Last week I met an old friend for lunch downtown…
I got there a few minutes early so I walked around the block, both to kill time and to see the old office building where I’d worked for many years. Now vacant, as I passed by I thought of all of the people I’d worked with there, where my former law firm had its offices for 60 years – especially those who had gone to the Great Bar Association meeting in the sky.
I thought specifically of the late William T. Smith, my law partner and KU Law School classmate. Bill used to joke about the phrase “pleading in the alternative.” That’s a legal phrase which means setting out multiple claims or defenses in a lawsuit, either hypothetically or alternatively, such that if one of the claims or defenses is held invalid or insufficient, the others would still have to be answered. The example he gave was that in a lawsuit alleging that I stole your bicycle, I could say; 1) I didn’t take it, and 2) If I did, it was broken!
I’m reminded of that kind of legal chicanery when I consider the lame arguments Planned Parenthood put forward the past two month after a series of videos were released by a pro-life group, the Center for Medical Progress:
A) The first category of arguments falls under the general heading; “We didn’t say what you heard or saw us say in those videos. Specifically, the videos were spliced and edited to make us seem to be saying certain things.”
Maybe when the Planned Parenthood executive in Los Angeles “joked” about getting “a Lamborghini” from selling body parts from aborted fetuses, she was actually saying something else. Maybe she really said, “I want a Bucatini,” while ordering lunch at an Italian restaurant where the videoed meeting took place.
B) The second argument is that; “You tricked us into saying those things!” We weren’t haggling over the price of organs with would-be purchasers, we were just discussing how we could best “pass along the costs” when making these “donations.” (If the costs are fixed and based on long experience, why do they have to be re-negotiated each time a new “donee” comes along?)
Moreover, we weren’t actually telling the under-cover investigators about how willing we are to change abortion procedures in order to better “harvest” fetal organs intact or whole infant cadavers. We were talking about something else entirely and those remarks were taken completely out of context. (We’d love to tell you what that something was, but this is a matter between “A WOMAN, A DOCTOR, AND HER GOD!”)
C) Finally, every woman understands that many “women’s health care decisions” can lead to “Yecchy!” results, but this is a hallmark of maturity and the adults among us are entirely unfazed by these videos. Move on! Nothing to see here!
Why, then, did one of the businesses which obtains organs from Planned Parenthood go to court to stop the release of these videos? How can a business corporation claim a “right to privacy,” like an individual, as happened here, in order to stop anyone from investigating its illegal or unethical behavior?
The alternative “pleading” to these various weak excuses and rationalizations is the always popular, “Oh yeah? What of it?” In fact, when Cecile Richards, the national head of Planned Parenthood, offered a muted apology for “the tone” of some of the more insensitive comments by its officials on the videos, she was immediately assailed by her brethren on The Left, who loudly insisted, “We’ve got nothing to be defensive about! In fact, abortion is a positive, healthy, thing, that you should be proud of!”
Thus we have our first abortion “selfie,” a video made last year by a woman named Emily Letts, who wanted to “share” with us the good side of the abortion experience. (The camera follows Ms. Lotts before, during, and after the abortion procedure so we get to see the whole thing, as well as hear her running commentary.) I confess that I should have seen this coming 19 years ago, when my teenage daughter received a flyer in the mail from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Very expensively printed, it urged her to vote against the Republican nominee for Congress in our district, my friend and law school classmate Vince Snowbarger.
Captioned “A Choice That Matters,” it shows a woman in her 60s and a girl in her early teens. The obvious age gap is meant to suggest a mother and a daughter, if not grandmother and granddaughter. The flyer accused Snowbarger of wanting to outlaw abortion if elected to Congress. Of course, national abortion policy was set by the U.S. Supreme Court in decisions such as Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood. It is not determined by a vote of the Congress, the state legislature, or any branch of government (up to and including the Johnson County Sheriff’s office or Board of County Commissioners.) The Democratic Party thus deliberately engaged in a dishonest scare tactic, aimed at the impressionable, i.e. teenagers.
Unfortunately these kinds of tactics are standard operating procedure for the party of Jackson and Jefferson. (I guess I’m not to mention those displaced idols anymore!) Who can forget the 50,000 pieces of campaign literature mailed out by the Sainted Martyr Bobby Kennedy during the 1968 California Democratic presidential primary? The leaflets, which went out to white suburban voters in the San Fernando Valley, claimed that Kennedy’s opponent in the primary, Senator Eugene McCarthy, was plotting to relocate hordes of black families from Watts, Compton, and other black neighborhoods in L.A. to the Valley:
“ Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he’s gone?
I thought I saw him walkin’ up over the hill
with Abraham, Martin, and John
Didn’t you love the things that they stood for?
Didn’t they try to find some good for you and me?
And we’ll be free
Some day soon, its gonna be one day”
(Recorded in 1968 by Dion, the song was composed by writer Dick Holler and produced by Phil Gernhard, best known for their 1966 novelty hit “Snoopy vs. The Red Baron.”)
Vince Snowbarger was himself defeated for relection two years after the abortion rights flyer was used against him. A Teamster sponsored phone bank operation spent almost half a million dollars calling every senior in the district three times to tell them they would not get their January social security checks if Vince was reelected.
This was so outrageous that even the Kansas City Star attacked his opponent Dennis Moore, whom they had endorsed, for sinking to such lowly tactics. It was a powerful, persuasive piece written by Star political correspondent Steve Kraske, that appeared five days after the election in which Snowbarger was defeated.
What made the “A Choice That Matters” Democratic flyer so uniquely offensive (but a harbinger of things to come), was the suggestion that the shared abortion experience could be a bond between the generations, the ultimate family value. At the time the flyer came to our mailbox, I commented that the older of the women should have a cartoon style balloon added, showing her saying to the younger, “I remember when I had my first abortion.”
It turns out that I was just ahead of my time. People Magazine had a review last week of a new movie, “Grandma.” It stars Lily Tomlin, as a lesbian poet, who goes on a picaresque journey around L.A. with her eighteen year old granddaughter to raise money for the girl to get an abortion.
Tomlin’s character is described as “hardly the standard granny… If she baked cookies, they’d be laced with pot!” (Tee-hee!) “If she read you a bedtime story, it’d be from the Feminine Mystique.” (Wow, like totally heavy!)
Along the way, the Tomlin character beats up the teenage boy who impregnated her granddaughter, always a good approach to handling relationship issues. You see, “Elle (Tomlin’s character) may be a battle ax, but she’s also grieving the loss of her partner Violet and hanging on by a thread.” People Magazine, August 31, 2015, ‘A Dozen Cool Things To See, Hear, Read, and Download This Week.’
Reading this article, I realized something that had been suggested to me some time ago but which I’d resisted as seeming hyperbole. Former Missouri GOP chair Woody Cozad told me that abortion is the sacrament of contemporary liberalism. I now know it is a blood sacrifice on the twin altars of feminism and sexual liberation. Precisely because it does represent the sacrificial offering of a human life to these tutelary deities of progressive dogma, it has a solemnity that make it off limits for reflection or discussion. (The brilliant-but unhinged- feminist writer Naomi Wolf has said as much.)
How sacrosanct the topic has become only become clear to me when I heard about an article which had been suppressed by the liberal blog Vox last month. In what was a rather abstruse discussion, the Scandinavian scholar Torbjorn Tannsjo referred to the concept of the “repugnant conclusion,” an idea with a long lineage in the history of philosophy. Simply stated, it’s the proposition that since most people feel the happiness in their lives outweighs the sadness, people have a moral obligation to have children since more people mean more happiness.
The editor of Vox, Dylan Matthews, rejected Tannsjo’s article, telling Tannsjo that the other staff on the blog were fearful that his piece might be used to justify a pro-life position and thus it shouldn’t be published. Unfortunately for Vox, Tannsjo released the rejection email for the post, which specifically said that it was its anti-abortion implications which led to its suppression, never mind Vox had asked the spurned academic to submit it in the first place!
We are truly reaching the state of intellectual repression described by George Orwell in ‘1984.’ The goal of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, like Vox and the other contemporary mavens of political correctness, was to so constrict the language that it couldn’t be used to conceive subversive opinions, let alone express them,
There is one other powerful reason why abortion on demand has such fervent and widespread support which you are even less likely to hear about from Planned Parenthood and its allies in the abortion rights movement than Dr. Tannsjo’s thesis.
I have in my possession two copies of a book called “The Dispossessed Majority,” by an obscure author known as Wilmot Robertson. The book has been correctly described as an anthology of late 20th century racist and anti-Semitic thought. There are chapters on Holocaust denial; Jewish control of the media, finance, and the arts; black intellectual inferiority; Hispanic criminality, etc; all presented in a cloud of pseudo-scientific rhetoric and dubious statistics. The grand thesis is that the nation is being destroyed by “non-white” minorities, with non-white broadly defined to include everyone from Italians, to Armenians (!), to Jews, or anyone else who falls on the wrong side of the Nazi Nordic/Non-Nordic divide.
I was given this book by a well-known local lawyer, who told me that “There’s a lot of truth in what it says.” (I’ve included a photo of the cover of the paperback edition of the book he gave me. I’ll get to the significance of the hard back copy later.)
He was an Ivy League graduate who was a law clerk for a federal judge, worked for a major law firm on Wall Street, and then became a partner of one of the oldest and most prestigious law firms in Kansas City. He and his wife, a teacher and community volunteer, lived in what was arguably K.C.’s most prestigious neighborhood, where she served as an elected official.
You may ask what is noteworthy about any of this.
Surely, no one should be surprised that Kansas City’s elite still contains its share of bigots, even though they’re too discrete to broadcast their views.
The import comes from the fact that these same local leaders and decision makers, despite their retrograde views, decided to turn their backs on the Republican Party and conservatism and support Democratic candidates like Dennis Moore, Kathleen Sebelius, Jill Docking, etc. Why? Because the G.O.P had become the pro-life party and the local elite backs abortion as a way to limit the population of African-Americans, Hispanics and other “undesirables” (including poor whites!).
I have been personally taken aside by a number of local executives, professionals, and high net worth individuals and told that as a conservative I should especially champion abortion because it means fewer blacks being born. They’ve repeatedly cited the fact that there are more black women having abortions annually in Washington D.C. than there are live births as an especially encouraging sign.
If you don’t think abortion is the deal breaker for the local wealthy who have abandoned their long Republican heritage, just ask them why they’ve left. They’ve been trained by the Kansas City Star and/or the Mainstream Coalition to say; “The party left me! It’s become way too extreme!”
If you ask them how it’s become “extreme,” they will invariably say because it opposes abortion, which by their definition is per se extremism.
To give you yet another example, I was at a social function when another local business leader told me that while he was a lifelong Republican, he had been supporting Dennis Moore for Congress because all his Republican opponents were “too extreme,” including Republican moderate Adam Taff.
I was puzzled because the only other political expression I’d ever heard from him was to give me a copy of an exquisite little publication called The Spotlight. An anti-black, jew-baiting broadsheet published by the notorious anti-Semite Willis Carto, it contained views that hardly fit the profile of someone who was rejecting the right-wing extremism of the G.O.P and turning to moderate or progressive beliefs.
I specifically asked him what the compelling reason was that led him to support Moore and he replied that “Shally-Barger” (he’d apparently conflated the names of Vince Snowbarger and Tim Shallenberger, the two Kansas Republican conservatives) was so “mean-spirited.” When I asked him what he meant by that, he replied that “Shally-Barger” (sic) was against abortion.
Yet another classically reactionary Republican CEO decided to pour money into the Kansas City branch of Planned Parenthood a few years ago. (His views were so retro, he was a central character in a satirical novel set here in Kansas City.)
At the same time he was funding an abortion clinic (at 47th and Troost, mmm… what do you think that was about?), he was spearheading an ill-conceived (and worse executed) attempt to pass an anti-union right-to-work law, a cause which is not usually associated with nascent liberal beliefs.
What on earth is going on here?
Why did all these absurdly backward looking mossbacks suddenly start acting like supporters of the National Organization of Women or EMILYS LIST?
Did they discover their inner feminist? Did they read, “Our Bodies, Our Selves” and suddenly decide that The Patriarchy should no longer deny women’s “reproductive rights?” The more glib would say their thinking was changed by talking to their wives and daughters. (This is a steal from the Vietnam anti-war movement, when opportunistic politicos would say their turn against the war was not based on polling data but “from talking to the kids.”)
This is risible because the people in question were the type who would be the last ones to talk about their political positions with women family members, let alone listen to them and be influenced by their beliefs.
Any lingering doubt about what was going on here was resolved for me on August 11, 2001. I was confronted on that day at a wedding reception at a local country club by one Sarah Ingram-Eiser, a local woman with leadership roles in both the local chapter of Planned Parenthood and the Mainstream Coalition (our left-wing high-tech hate group). I’ve known Sarah for 50 plus years (she was a teacher at my elementary school) and she is well aware of my conservative views. She’d apparently had the one-cocktail-too-many because she decided to ask me point blank: “When you see a black woman walking along Troost, leading three or four children by the hand, don’t you want to stop your car and scream at her, ‘Do you know what you’re doing!?”
CONCLUSION
The hard back copy of the book which I first got from my Harvard Law grad managing partner in paperback I bought on line in order to write this article in case the original didn’t turn up. (It surfaced over the Labor Day weekend in my attic where I’d shame-facedly stashed it years ago for just such an occasion.)
The book came from a prison library (“Federal Correctional Institution- Sheridan”). It has a check out card with spaces to write “Inmate Names.” I’ve read that white supremacist groups like the Aryan Brotherhood and the Aryan Nation are now recruiting in prisons. Books like this are obvious recruiting tools.
I’m sure my Harvard Law buddy would love to know that he and F. Glenn Miller, Jr., convicted murderer, have a shared worldview, which can best be served by seeing to it that as many black children are aborted as possible.
The next time you talk to somebody who champions abortion, ask them how they like having those haters as their comrades in arms against those “mean-spirited” pro-lifers? How comfortable would the Black Lives Matter people feel if they were told their fellow progressives think, “Black childrens’ lives matter but only after they’re born. Before that we’d just as soon they never see the light of day.”
I know that “politics make for strange bed fellows” but if your ‘bunkies’ are strange or repellant enough, you may want to hop out of that particular bed.
Welcome back, Dwight, and great piece. It’s loaded with tidbits for my “flaming liberal” perspective to take issue with.
First, on a minor, side point, and even though both parties might try to claim him, imho Jefferson, as a small government, low taxes, states rights advocate in his day, was much more of a republican by today’s standards. He was very much the contrasting viewpoint to Hamilton and those that advocated for a strong central government at the Constitutional Convention. The GOP should tout Jefferson as one of their own and laugh at any implication that he would favor the strong central government view of the left. I think you were questioning the accuracy of the Democratic Party claiming to be the party of Jackson and Jefferson anyway, so I have no real issue with you on this, just with anyone who does think Jefferson would be anything other than a republican today based on his strong position on a limited central government.
As a loyal democrat, I absolutely love it when those on the right continue to make a topic out of Planned Parenthood. It seems like such an obvious disconnect to me for republicans who advocate for small government, limited government, that should stay out of the way of the private sector and reduce or eliminate federal regulations but see no conflict to advocate that the federal government has every right to set up shop in the vaginas of our wives and daughters. How is that not government overreach? On a personal level, I do not favor abortion and I really doubt that many democrats favor abortion. What I do think is that many, if not most democrats really think that the decision to abort a pregnancy is the personal decision of that women and is no one else’s business. I first met Woody Cozad decades ago as he practiced law with a couple of attorneys we both know and he is a very sharp guy but the statement that “abortion is the sacrament of contemporary liberalism” is inaccurate and provocative. Abortion is an extremely personal decision that belongs to that woman and her partner, but in the end, the decision belongs to the woman alone. I’m a democrat and I do NOT favor abortion but it is not my decision. Anyone who thinks democrats favor abortion is way off base. What we do think about abortion is that, ultimately, it is none of our business.
If the GOP really wants to win the upcoming presidential election, they really need to start focusing on the opinions of the 50%+ of the electorate that resides in the middle of the policital spectrum. Yes, the Planned Parenthood “gotcha” video is red meat to the base but the base is not who is going to win them the election. The majority of the voters are women and most women see Planned Parenthood as a source of health care for women. It is not an evil organization in their minds. To me, continuing to rail against Planned Parenthood will result in alienating the largest demographic out there. They should focus on job creation and the economy. The same thing with immigration. The GOP should come up with a rational plan on immigratiuon going forward. To think we should round up and kick out millions and build a wall is financially and logistically insane. To have Trump say the idiotic things he has said about immigrants and then have the rest of the GOP field either support him, or let his comments go largely unchallenged is doing nothing but alienating a demographic that otherwise has much in common with the GOP platform. At their current pace, the GOP will be lucky to even get close to 20% of the growing Hispanic vote. That would not bode well for the GOP in November of 2016.
I think what your friends mean when they say they did not leave the republican party, the republican party left them is that the party moved away from focusing on fiscal conservatism and moved towards a focus on social conservatism. If the GOP were to jettison their allegiance to social conservatism ( abortion, gay marriage, etc.) and focus on fiscal conservatism they would be a much more formidable adversary. Otherwise it will be an ugly result for them next November, in my humble opinion.
Thanks for your effort here Dwight. You are on the wrong side of the issue but you presented it well and supported it well. I look forward to your political offerings in the coming months.
please stomp…sometime you go overboard with your bloviating.
let Harley put it very simple to the simple minded opposition.
If you declare war on women…you will never stay in power or control
the government…because the new females of voting age think differently
than the gray hairs at te repub conventions.
If you declare war on Hispanics you will never win another national
election. calling them names will kill you because without 45% of their
votes you lose. and in states like florida/texas/Illinois/ eetc. they
are growing fast and you and your repug friends will be out on the
street like snowberger.
If you hate lgbt voters…they wll destroy your party. they have incredible
resources and money and they will play a huge role in future elections.
If your supporters shoot and kill doctors who are within the law…people
will see this and understand that the laws must be enforced and that
those who advocate breaking the laws must be held accountable. Where
is your dfenese of the law against killing doctors. Maybe yu’re saving it
for another column. I hope so.
When the corpos and the banks send trillions overseas to save or not
pay taxes while th 98 per cent pay the bills that catches up with you.
I’m sure you and your boys have these accounts….the heyday is about
to come to an end. Even your boy trump says lets end the breaks for
your kn on wall street and those banking overseas.
Sir…you are on the wrong side of history right now. Luckily you
did me a favor by selling land to top golf and I thanks you personally.
But you no longer represent the 90% of America that is rising….
and you and your boys wll face the wrath of a new “silent majority” who
have seen and heard enough.
thanks for reading my post
your frien and grateful top golf enthusiast
Harley
I mentioned Jefferson and Jackson because those two worthy gentlemen have been expelled from the Democratic Party pantheon as un-pc.No more will there be any Democratic celebrations or state party dinners in their name. Thanks,we will be glad to take them in. For the last twenty years or so the GOP has made a serious effort to get away from the divisive social issues(‘Gays,Guns,&God’).There was no mention of them in the Contract With America,which gave us Congress for the first time in forty years. The Tea Party made a conscious decision to avoid them and stick to spending,debt,and the growth of government,i.e.the fiscal conservatism we’re talking about. The Koch family has build a powerful libertarian flavored conservative movement,with many of their positions heretical to social conservatives(gay rights,drugs,mandatory sentencing,etc.). But guess what,Stomper? We’re still denounced just as viciously by the Left,still told we’re by definition “extremists”, still subject to smear and vitriol as greedy,selfish,racist hate mongers by the KC Star,NPR,MSNBC, the NY Times,Salon,Vox,the Daily Beast,etc..Look at the kind of personal attacks I’ve been subject to by the trolls on this blog. Letting our beliefs fall by the way side on the social issues is both spineless and a total exercise in futility if you think we’ll get any slack from our critics. Bernie Sanders has,by contrast,people showing up at his rallies wearing hammer & sickle t-shirts and nobody says a thing about HIS “extremism”. It’s truly a ‘heads I win,tails you lose”situation.
Bernie is extreme, no argument from me. Since we are so far ahead of the election, now is the time for extremists to shine ( Trump, Sanders, etc) but in the end, the establishment candidates will cross the finish line first. I think Bush/Kasich is your best ticket but I’m a heathen. As I have said before, if Rubio would soften his rhetoric and move more to the center like Bush and/or Kasich, he would be very, very formidable. The camera loves the guy and he is young and articulate.
I do think you have been subject to unfair personal attacks here. I try to be polite with my disdain for your views. I understand your view on being spineless if you let your social views fall by the wayside. I’m just saying that waving the banner on Planned Parenthood, Gay Marriage, etc. is not helping your chances at election victory. Maybe not the best cards to lead with. Goal should be winning the White House and critics be damned.
Thanks Dwight. I appreciate the response.
How many children have you adopted?
We have 3 and are currently working on adding a forth adopted child.
I have been fortunate in having two children with my wife of forty plus years. We have grandchildren as well. I have represented clients adopting children. I have also represented a number of young people in Juvenile Court proceedings on a pro bono basis. I also mentored teenagers who were having behavioral problems and tutored grade school kids in the inner city.I thus resent the implication that I’m somehow a hypocrite because I didn’t adopt children of my own. I have nothing but admiration for those who have . I don’t think you can honestly say I don’t care about children if you knew my personal history,which is what you want to convey.
My first response to you apparently didn’t pass the moderation test, so allow me a do over…
You are obviously aware of the hypocrisy of your position because that is exactly what you are.
“For the last twenty years or so the GOP has made a serious effort to get away from the divisive social issues(‘Gays,Guns,&God’).”
That’s the complete opposite of what I’ve seen and what surveys show. Sure, the leadership is trying to steer away from the crazies, but you can see how well that’s turning out. Moderate and centrist Republicans, like myself, have left the party in droves, leaving a shriveled membership that makes up less than a quarter of registered voters today. Over half of Republicans reject evolution and climate science. Most of them still think Obama is a Muslim. The majority of Republicans were not this stupid back when I was a proud College Republican and worked for George HW Bush’s re-election campaign. We supported investing in infrastructure and science R&D, cleaning up the environment, student aid, etc. Now the most popular leaders of the conservative movement are Limbaugh, Palin, and Trump who act like monkeys throwing their poo at passersby. This is embarrassing.
“The Tea Party made a conscious decision to avoid them and stick to spending,debt,and the growth of government”
Every one of them I’ve ever met was a social conservative and extremely hostile towards Hispanic immigrants. Never have I seen these guys demanding that the government get out of our bedrooms and uteruses.
“The Koch family has build a powerful libertarian flavored conservative movement…”
They are right wingers who always support Republicans. I never see these supposed middle of the road libertarians support Democrats. They give lip service to socially liberal positions but at the end of the day they throw their money behind socio-religious conservative candidates.
another long winded bunch of bull from southy. Everything you accuse the left
of doing is being done (but only worse by the right). Oh my god…phone banks
that the dems use…are you saying phone banks using outright lies aren’t
used by repugs (remember bush using the “black child” calls against McCain in 2000)?
again…so slanted a story its not even “fair and balanaced”:.
And you give your republican brothers and sisters a slap in the face when you
blame a newspaper and a small group of people for runnin away from your
broken down party. give them some credit for being intelligent/thinking
people and don’t downgrade them because they saw the light!!!!!!!
And thanks to my work we sent that guy snowbarger back to olathe where he
belonged. It wasn’t just the phone banks it was me….yes me and a staff who
whipped that guy bad in the 3rd and sent himdownhill from there!!!!!!!!!
How does it feelwith your boy brownie doing such a good job? why not write about
his “mess” that he created plus some of the highest taxes in the nation
I mean look at the mess he’s created.
and how does it feel to watch your bel0ved party go downhill nationally
as they cling to the same old white males that are dying off and the racist
boys that cling to their guns and bibles as they sink into history. Stop blaming
hypothetical b.s. for those losses. It was gotv southy. Not a phone bank…..
and for someone who hatesthe star you sure can come up with old old names
and articles to blame for what ws one of the worst pols in 3rd district history.
We buried that dude. Even moderate repugs couldn’t stand the guy.
These are lean days for guys like you. I mean with trump beating your
establishment candidates…and what many republicans say could be the end
of the “republican” party.
then theres your buddy adam taff. no more needs to be said. Nice guy
made a mistake and does time.
obviously you’re not hanging at the carriage club no more…and therepubs
in joco are pretty disgusted with your boy!
that’s okay….you can write about stuff from 1980 and bore me…because
for repubs it’s all about excuses…excuses…excuses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
nice article for someone with insomnia.
but I wonder …how do you feel about those who kill the doctors who follow the
law as it stands about abortion. You sure seem to forget them dude!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Damn good read, DS. As a male, I don’t feel like I have a dog in the fight. I come down on the side of “it’s a woman’s body.” I don’t get to tell her what to do with it.
Always found irony in the fact that millions and millions of people that oppose abortion ALSO oppose contraception. Seems strange.
Like all “wedge” issues, there’s plenty of hypocrisy to go around for both sides.
also southy…you….as a former KU grad I would be very very interested in hearing
your highly regarded and intellectually profound decisive opinion on the
recent ‘KU JAYHAWK/KSU P**** CONTROVERSEY THAT WAS SO
ASTOUTELY REPORTED ON BY MR. WILSON IN A PREVIOUS KCC ARTICLE.
It would be refreshing to hear a real KU alumni and supporter give us his
personal opinion of this HUGE and GROWING controversy!
At last H-Man,a chance to engage on an issue of vital concern, Please give me your class action lawyer buddy’s contact info so we can file a suit on behalf of all KU grads for intentional infliction of emotional distress against the Wildcats. Once,more those sophisticates from Manhattan are lording it over us because of their subtle wit and polished humor. How can we compete with such worldly and clever souls? I feel all kinds of foolish just thinking about it. What happened left me diminished as a human and I don’t know when,if ever,I can recover my self-respect. Someone is going to pay! Rock Chalk Payback!
This is kcconfidential hitting on all cylinders.
Great article and great comments so far.
I actually agree with everything Stomper posted. My temp is normal and I don’t feel sick.
I have, like Jim a.k.a. BWH, have always thought that it was none of my business if a woman chose to have an abortion. I myself was an orphan, but I still thought it was a hard choice that girls had to ultimately make. Those videos, revealed folks from Planned Parenthood as ghouls and rightly so. Still, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle in my opinion. As I understand it, most abortions are 1st trimester affairs and should, again, in my opinion, be a decision made by the mother. If there is going to be an adjustment of Roe V Wade, then it would seem logical to take into consideration the viability (Which, I realize is an opinion.) of the fetus and perhaps a ban on late term abortion.
Those videos were horrible, but most of the women I know, including my wife, don’t want Planned Parenthood dismantled.
Just sayin…
🙂
Planned Parenthood does do good for the benefit of society. They do other things besides abortion you know.
So Dwight, what you are saying is that a woman should not have control over her own body and what happens to it? Funny that it happens to be usually a bunch of men that determine the laws concerning abortion.
I can understand the position that abortion may be a necessary evil,to be avoided if possible,but still there as a last resort.(This seems to have been the position of the Clinton administration,which said it wanted to keep abortion ‘safe,legal,and rare’.)I don’t understand the position that it is a positive,good thing,that can unite women in a shared bonding experience between the generations in a family. I also still don’t have an answer to my point,i.e.don’t you good,sincere liberals feel a little embarrassed when making blatantly racist pitches-albeit surreptitiously- to sell your policies? As for the old canard that only men oppose abortion,ask yourself the following;”Who is the more likely to welcome abortion as a way to get out of a shot-gun marriage or paying years of child support? Men or women? Who is more likely to have an emotional tie to an unborn child and thus not want to see it aborted? A man or a woman?” The fact is that men probably are more in favor of abortion for the reasons I just suggested. You also didn’t answer my broader point. Distributing birth control is one thing. Selling body parts is another. The fact that PP does some legitimate,even praise worthy,things in some areas doesn’t excuse them from doing illegal and unethical things in others.
Yes, there is a creepy eugenics side behind some of planned parenthood just like there is a despicable side of conservatism that wants no abortion but does not want to help the poor mother with her child once she does have that child instead of aborting it. Bootstraps for everyone and screw the poor bastard that is born to the poor mother. There are positives and negatives to every argument for and against, I think there is more positive in the argument for Planned Parenthood than negative.
Reread my statement about men making the decisions on the laws concerning abortion- that is what I said- women are usually absent from those discussions and decision making. Don’t you think they should be involved?
As to the selling of body parts to medical institutions- I will leave that up to the medical boards and regulators to figure out if there is wrongdoing there and you should probably too. Funny that there are no actual medical boards that would govern over this activity that has come out and hit them with sanctions or fines over these activities.
I welcome the opportunity to shoot down another cliche-the old saw that conservatives are hypocrites because they oppose abortion but” don’t care what happens to children after they’re born”. We want kids to be starved,beaten,or molested ? We oppose child welfare laws or foster homes to take of children who need protection ? We are against adoption to give children loving homes who would otherwise be institutionalized ?Of course not!!! What people who make this argument are really saying is that those of us who don’t feel the State should have the primary responsibility of providing cradle to grave care for all its citizens don’t “care” about children. Not quite. As for what goes on in selling body parts,we are a commercial culture and the almighty dollar too often means ethics take a back seat. In fairness,science has gotten the jump on morality with the dizzying rate of technological change and we’re constantly faced with issues that no one foresaw.
I don’t understand the position that it a positive,good thing,that can unite women in a shared bonding experience between the generations in a family.
I previously explained that I understood the position that abortion,while regrettable,is a necessary evil. I just don’t buy the zealotry of someone who insists that it’s a positive,even desirable thing. Nor because I believe in divorce being legal does it require that I celebrate it as something to be welcomed.
Thanks for the incentive, Dwight. As a tribute, I will be paying for 10 abortions over the next few weeks and assisting with money/rides/etc. for those wanting abortions for the foreseeable future.
Did you ever think that abortion might have something to do with the disappearance of healthy,normal American babies available for adoption? Many of my friends have had to go overseas to adopt.
When you find the time to adopt one child, then I will allow you to suggest stuff to me on this subject, but until then, your words are hollow jibber jabber.
Why don’t you see that ten children can be adopted by parents who desperately want children but can’t have them? Wouldn’t that be a happier result for all concerned?
People able to adopt, like you?
Hypocrites who stand on a stump telling others what to do but can’t be bothered to do it themselves are helping zero causes.
“I don’t understand the position that it a positive,good thing,that can unite women in a shared bonding experience between the generations in a family.”
I don’t understand how divorce is a positive, good thing, that can unite women (or men) in a shared bonding experience between generations of a family either, but I’m not going to rip pages out of the bible and get on a religious soapbox asking that it be outlawed. So, I suggest that conservatives keep on keepin’ on over the abortion issue and keep losing presidential elections. Keep on keepin’ on over gay marriage as well. 60% of the country doesn’t give a shi* whether two men or two women want to get married. They have better things to worry about. So again, keep on keepin’ on.
Reagan and both Bush 41 & 43 were pro-life and they won. Gerry Ford was pro-choice and lost. Jimmie Carter,Walter Mondale,Michael Dukakis,Al Gore, and John Kerry were pro-choice and lost. Gay marriage was opposed by Bill Clinton,John Kerry,Barack Obama,and Hilary Clinton until public opinion shifted and they all suddenly found their views had “evolved”.So spare me the patronizing remarks about how we Republicans are stupid losers for taking positions that have apparently very little to do with determining the outcome of elections and which you D’s have also held until it was politically expedient to abandon them.
As the Kelsey Harkness tweet demonstrates, nothing says young, hip, and cool quite like abortion does. Anyone got any Planned Parenthood schwag that I can get a hold of? I want to impress the younger broads next time I attend the P&L in person.
Re: Adoptions
I once had an argument with some pro life people who said there was a shortage of babies to adopt. I then called whatever Catholic charity is involved with adoptions. They said that there is indeed a shortage of perfect white newborns to adopt and that is why people go overseas to adopt. HOWEVER–there is no shortage of non white, not perfect, not newborns to adopt. So it is relatively easy to adopt a mixed race or black child, or a physically and/or mentally disabled child, or an older child-particularly one with behavioral issues.
So Dwight, despite your representing adoptions in court or mentoring teenagers (all of which is admirable but inadequate), I do find financially secure pro life advocates to be hypocrites unless they adopt children who are difficult to place. If one or both of your children are disabled, then you get a pass. But the same hypocrisy applies to all the pro lifers.
And yes, I proudly donate money to Planned Parenthood each year and I am proudly pro choice. Not pro abortion but pro choice.
And no–I don’t think that having more children available for your friends to adopt is a good argument for eliminating Planned Parenthood or banning abortions. Tell them to adopt non perfect, non white, older kids. There are plenty available.
I’m sorry,I don’t think it is fair to say that someone doesn’t care about children because he doesn’t think a child that would otherwise be born healthy should be aborted. I have seen all the things that can go wrong in childbirth. I’ve witnessed first hand families struggling with children’s birth defects and physical and mental handicaps. It seems to me,based on this personal experience, a shameful waste that normal babies be disposed before birth for reasons of personal convenience or preference. I do appreciate your response because it reveals a fundamental flaw in the pro-choice position i.e.I also don’t like to see people engaged in child abuse and support laws against it. Am I thus a hypocrite because I don’t personally open my home to all the victims of child abuse and commit to financially support those children to adulthood? I’m sure you feel the same way-that children should be protected from a variety of terrible things-but that doesn’t make you a hypocrite because you don’t personally take on the responsibility of caring for those children. We should all do what we can-as volunteers,as citizens,as members of a church,synagogue or mosque.The fact that we don’t shoulder the whole burden as individuals doesn’t make us hypocrites.
What I said is that I am pro choice. I support a woman’s right to choose. One of those choices can be to put her child up for adoption. When she does just that, if the child is disabled or non white, where are all the pro lifers who wanted her to have the child and not have an abortion? Why are there any children in this country who need to be adopted? I don’t think there is a scarcity of pro lifers. I do think it is very fair for me to say that any pro lifer who is financially secure and capable of raising children is hypocritical not to adopt ONE of these type of children.
And yes, showing up in court for a few hours pro bono to represent children who have been abused is very admirable but it is only some hours each week. It’s really not much of a commitment from one who writes a column about being pro life and anti Planned Parenthood. If you are so pro life, financially secure and capable of raising one of them, then yes–I think you need to do more. These abused children are in a horrible situation. I find anti abortionists to mostly be anti abortion and then wash their hands of the children once born.
No one is saying that you have to personally open your home to ALL victims of child abuse but are you really telling me that you could not afford to take in just ONE abused child or adopt ONE disabled newborn? Really? You cannot take in ONE?
Jews say that to save ONE life is to save the entire world. Come on, Dwight. Put your money and commitment where your pen is. Save the world! or don’t bother replying or writing any more pro life articles. Talk is cheap.
Lee,how many foster children have you taken into your home who are the victims of abuse or neglect? if you haven’t taken any, you forfeit any moral standing to object to those practices. That is the necessary logic of your position. I might note that Governor Brownback and Congressmen Huelskamp(as well as Senator John McCain) adopted children of other races but I don’t recall that lessened the abuse and opprobrium they got from you liberal Democrats for their pro-life positions. This tells me this is a bogus debating trick and even if your opponents did what you say,you’d just find some other reason to slander them. I’m glad you mention Jewish teachings. My friend,the late Richard Nadler of Ruckus fame, showed me how that faith also proscribes abortion,as does the Hippocratic Oath,which for 2500 years,since the 5th century B.C.,has been the basis of medical ethics. Tom Wolfe,in his novel of campus life(“I Am Charlotte Simmons”) describes a Jewish academic who doesn’t personally believe in abortion but feels compelled to support it politically because the Religious Right is against it and he hates and fears evangelical Christians. I think that is what is going on here.
Dwight–you are losing your grip. You are bringing up strawmen and ideas that have no bearing on this topic.
#1. I am not the one who wants to ban abortion–the effect of which would be to have more “imperfect” children up for adoption. You just said your friends have to go overseas to adopt. That’s because abortions are legal. We no longer have orphanages either. However, as I stated earlier and which you have refused to address, there are still plenty of imperfect children in need of loving parents.
#2. I don’t like kids, I don’t have any, I never intend to have any, I don’t want any. I would not be a desirable parent. That is the “necessary logic” of why I don’t adopt or raise foster children. That is also why I donate to Planned Parenthood. I also donate to other children related programs.
#3. You already have children so I assume you are a good parent. Asking why I don’t adopt or raise children is not relevant to YOUR refusal to adopt just ONE child or take in just ONE abused child since you are so pro life. You attack me and bring up irrelevant topics to obfuscate YOUR refusal to do something tangible in a “post born” child’s life.
#4. Bringing in Tom Wolfe describing a fictional character that he fictionally psychoanalyses to conclude his pro choice represents his aversion to the religious right is just an ad hominem grasping at straws because you have been called out. I actually thought you had more intellectual heft than that.
#5. I have several religious right friends. One couple I know did adopt a special needs child and I admire them greatly. The others are too old to take on the responsibility of a child or are financially unable to so they get a pass.
#6. If Brownback et al did adopt unwanted minority children (I assume they adopted an unwanted black child as opposed to a trendy Asian baby), then good for them. If other people heap opprobrium on them for that, then they are wrong. I heap scorn on McCain for his stupid choice of a running mate not his adopted child. I was going to vote for him until that and I am no fan of Obama. As for Brownback, I love him. His tax policies have saved me a lot of money. I use the money I saved to increase my donations to Planned Parenthood.
Again, I heap scorn on pro lifers like you who are financially able and fit to be parents yet who have never adopted a special needs or minority child or an older abused child. All of you should look deep in the mirror, ask yourself why you have never really adopted such a child, and take some personal responsibility. It’s not too late Dwight. Save the world!!! Quit blaming everyone else for your failure and hypocrisy.
The whole genesis of The Mainstream Coalition was to scare Jewish business owners and professionals to vote against their self interest by scaring them with the bogeyman of the religious right(I’m sorry,”The Radical Religious Right”!). I personally was spit on,had doors slammed in my face,and had my campaign leaflets thrown back at me when I went door to door when running for the state senate in Johnson County in 2000 and 2004. Nine times out of ten it was a Jewish household where this happened. My supporters were approached by their Jewish neighbors and told that my yard signs in my supporters’ yard offended the neighbors as Jews and that they should be taken down.All this was because I was said to be the candidate of the “Radical Religious Right”.(The heavily Jewish portion of Mission Hills was by far and away my worst precinct of the 53 I ran in.) My friend Vince Snowbarger had a letter sent out attacking him by a number of prominent members of the Jewish community to hundreds of Jewish families suggesting that because of his religious background(he is a Nazarene from Olathe)he was a threat to the Jewish community who had to be stopped at all costs from becoming a U.S. Congressman.(Meanwhile Dennis Moore was soliciting Arab-Americans’ support by telling them Snowbarger was too pro-Israel.)This was all the cynical handiwork of left-wing Christian clergy like the late John Swomley and Bob Meneilly.It was a deliberate attempt to set the Jewish community off against evangelical Christians and pro-life Catholics.Meanwhile,the same Mainstream Coalition was preaching in Protestant churches that the Religious Right was a Papist conspiracy,”which had its origin in 1979 in a secret conclave in the Vatican”.(I love the image of hard-shell Baptists like Falwell and Robertson kissing the Pope’s ring!),Remarks of Dr, John Swomley,April 25th,1996 In other words,the Mainstream Coalition was appealing to the presumed fears and resentments of the particular audience it was in front of and would change the message to fit the venue.In front of a Jewish audience,of course,the enemy was always Christian fundamentalists. In short,I know what I ‘m talking about,having fought this battle for twenty years. Tom Wolfe just got it down in a novel of manners but it is based on real life experience that any one who follows politics in this country would instantly recognize.
They have the right to life, just PLEASE, keep them out of the MY backyard. I think that’s the sentiment. Is there anything wrong with that?
Your comment reminds me of something the fictional character Jason Compson,in William Faulkner’s “The Sound and The Fury”would say.One of the all-time great S.O.B.s in American literature,Compson is given to long,bitter self-serving(and self-pitying)monologues,usually racist to boot. One such gem was;”Lincoln freed the blacks from us,when is somebody gonna free us from the blacks?” Another was,”You Yankees want the blacks to get ahead. I want them to get ahead too, so far ahead there’s not one left south of the Mason-Dixon line.”Your logic and that of Lee and Flyin’ Bryan is the same as the fictional Compson’s. Unless you’re willing to assume full responsibility for people I’m victimizing-and thus take the problem off my hands-you’re a ‘big-ole-hypocrite’,can’t criticize or object and thus I’m free to do whatever I want.Is there anything wrong with that?
WTF? Abortion in America has been legal since 1973. Everything ginned up by “opponents” to the law of the land since has been utter specious crap. That simple.
Abortion was legalized by Roe in 1973. That decision by the Supreme Court still allowed the states considerable leeway in regulating the practice,especially when it came to late term abortions. Since that time the ability of the states to in any way regulate or limit abortion has been largely abrogated by decisions like Casey v. Planned Parenthood. In other words,the law has changed materially so it’s not fair to say the”law of the land”has been the same since 1973. The Supreme Court decision of Plessy v. Ferguson,which legalized Jim Crow,was also “the law of the land”for almost sixty years. I’m sure there were Southern segregationists who made the argument that you made on the eve of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954-“Segregation in America has been legal since 1896. Everything ginned up by”opponents”to the law of the land since has been utter specious crap. That simple.”It’s actually not that simple because long enshrined legal doctrines can and have been overturned.
Dwight, just wow. All of a sudden, totally out of the blue, and totally unrelated to anything that was part of this thread, you launch into a bitter attack against the Mainstream Coalition and the Jews of Mission Hills for all your perceived troubles..
Did your family belong to a restrictive country club by any chance? Maybe you will next say that some of your best friends are Jews who live in Mission Hills (which is so ironic because JC Nichols wrote restrictive covenants into the deeds of Mission Hills which may not have yet been found to be illegal by the Supreme Court when you were growing up).
Just scratch a right wing conservative hard enough and you find a paranoid lunatic. Seriously, get some help.
I blame Obama and the Jews for your problems as I am sure you do also.
Assuming Hearne doesn’t delete your paranoid rantings, at least anyone who reads this will know enough to ignore you in the future.
I had dinner a few years ago with a very successful entrepreneur named Jerry. Jerry had owned a number of wildly successful businesses including restaurants,banks,car dealerships,and radio stations. He really had a fascinating life and we talked about the memoirs he was writing. The talk turned to politics and Jerry said he was hesitant to support the GOP as he had in the past because someone told him that its presidential nominee was likely to be a televangelist(Gary Bauer). I was exasperated as a Republican when I heard this because someone had told him this as a Jew to get him to support the Democratic party instead,knowing that many Jews dislike fundamentalist Protestants. My anger was reserved for the people who took advantage of his political naivety to mislead and manipulate him. I am less angry at the people who did the things I described(and a lot more that I haven’t) than I am at the people like the rich Wasps that manipulated them through the Mainstream Coalition into doing those things. You mention restrictive country clubs and restrictive racial covenants. The people who belong to those country clubs and who wrote those covenants are the same ones who bankroll the Mainstream Coalition and Planned Parenthood. The other group that regards evangelical Christians with particular scorn are wealthy Wasps,who regard them as their social and intellectual inferiors who have taken over the Republican Party,which they regard as their private preserve. The only people I had less support from in Mission Hills than in the Jewish community was among fellow members of the Kansas City Country Club and I was told repeatedly to my face it was because I had aligned myself with the”Radical Religious Right”on the issue of abortion. This included members who were in my family. These things happened to me. I recall these incidents vividly and they are a large part of why I resigned from the club. They are not figments of a paranoid imagination and that you make such an allegation is a sign that you have lost the argument and are resorting to ad hominem attacks.
Bluster, that is the only word to support your position, you have present not one FACT relating to abortion and how to limit it’s occurrence, nothing and that is par for the course with those aligned with the money machine known as “right to life”.
Colorado teen pregnancy rates have plummeted:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/07/1312252/-Colorado-teen-birth-rates-plummet-thanks-to-contraceptive-program
“The decline in births among girls 15 to 19 years old served by the program accounted for three-quarters of the overall decline in the Colorado teen birth rate, the state said in a news release.
That rate has fallen from 37 births per 1,000 girls in 2009 to 22 in 2013, officials said.
The teen abortion rate dropped 35 percent from 2009 to 2012 in those counties where the initiative is in place, Hickenlooper said.”
Why? one would ask is Colorado so different, well they told the feds to shove it’s fake abstinence only program up it’s republican asses, well most, Clinton is the one who signed the original bill:
“While it is difficult to pinpoint precisely how different factors influence teenage sexual behavior, some experts speculate that the rise in teenage pregnancy might be partly attributable to the $150 million a year of federal financing for sex education that emphasized abstinence until marriage, avoiding all mention of the possible benefits of contraception.
“This new study makes it crystal clear that abstinence-only sex education for teenagers does not work,” said Cecile Richards, the president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
The Clinton administration began financing abstinence-only programs as part of welfare reform, but such programs got a large boost in the Bush administration.
The Obama administration has moved away from abstinence-only programs, creating a new teenage-pregnancy initiative in which most financing will go to programs that have been shown to prevent pregnancy, with some experimental approaches.”
Hopefully sometime soon Dwight you will actually spend some time researching the subjects you want to spew shit about, instead of being lockstep with the catholic overlords. The hate and dogma of the past do not work in the society designed by our founding fathers and interpreted and evolved by our courts and lawmaker’s.
I can suggest some books to help improve your research abilities instead of relying on pure anecdotal stories to form an opinion, or just do what I did Google it.
Anecdotal evidence implies something you’ve heard second or third hand. The things I recounted in this exchange either happened to me directly or to friends and neighbors whom I trust and who told me about what happened at the time.I love your reference to “Catholic Overlords”.(I thought this was a Baptist Cabal?) Do you mean the current Pope? I thought you guys were crazy about him. Quoting Cecile Richards as an authority at this point is like quoting that Duggar kid on sexual morality.Can’t you do better than that ? This really is shooting fish in a barrel!
The Center for Medical Research didn’t exist a few months before they released their heavily edited film. They are connected to the same folks who produced the discredited gottcha films on PBS, ACORN and other pieces of propaganda.
Indeed the PP folks in the film show how their “tolerance” is more about their superiority to others. Just as those on the other side show how their “religion” makes them morally superior.
Teaching abstinence only in schools, trying to make contraceptives illegal are also goals of many of those who oppose abortion.
Making abortions safe, legal and rare is a good policy.
Forcing your religious dogma and values on others is not.
When did I ever say I was against contraceptives? On the contrary,like Republican Senator Corey Gardner of Colorado, I think birth control pills should be sold over the counter. You also say I’m in favor of abstinence only sex ed. Where did I say that? These claims get to an important point- why don’t we try to come up with workable programs which prevent unwanted out of wedlock pregnancies,especially for teen agers. I’m for what ever programs that can achieve this goal. Why are we in some sort of Catch 22,where I have to either accept abortion on demand,at any stage of the pregnancy,or agree to mandatory adoption regardless of my suitability as a parent,or be branded a ‘hypocrite’? That’s a false,Hobson’s choice-i.e. the world is full of problems which we can be bothered by without us committing to take on the entire responsibiity for solving them personally. The better solution is to avoid the unwanted pregnancy in the first place. Otherwise,we get locked into the tribalism that these comments reflect.(If your tribe is against abortion,my tribe is for it! That’s the mindset of too many. It’s like the latest polling data on registered Democrats-their support for a single payer health care system falls precipitously once they hear Donald Trump is for it! Maybe their is a silver lining in his running after all!)
Where did I mention Dwight D Sutherland, Jr in my post?
My response was on your choice of documentation for your position and their lack of credibility and their founder’s agenda.
Just a little PTSD from your attackers’ posts?
The Center for Medical Progress people also made available the full tape of these conversations to compare with the versions they released. Can you point to specific instances in any of these seven transcripts where the meaning of what was originally said was altered in the edited version? In court cases I work on edited video-taped pre-trial depositions are used all the time. That is done so as not to waste time with a bunch of extraneous matters. As long as the full,unedited transcript is available,as happened here, so there is no monkey business, where’s the beef?
The Center for Medical Research belongs in the same group as Michael Moore. Without the transparency.
This group is just another in a long line of groups Astroturfing as a grassroots organization.
Let’s start with how their 501c application was for a biological research organization rather than an anti-abortion organization. Eventually forced to come clean.
Board member, Troy Newman, writing a sympathetic about the murderer of a doctor who performed abortions.
Allies like Cheryl Sullenger who was jailed for her attempt to commit terrorist by bombing an abortion clinic. She also aided Scott Roeder in stalking Dr Tiller before Roeder murdered him.
The deceptive editing used to imply something other being stated (the sale of body parts) when the eight-minutes edited out of the conversation on legal methods of reimbursement of costs rather than for profit.
The editing completely changes the context of the conversation.
Other than using this group to represent truth, I have no argument with what you wrote.
When the lady from Planned Parenthood says that she’s not going to bid against herself when asked what their charges are to cover the cost of donations,this means they intend to ask an amount that more than just covers the costs. If you have an idea what those costs are from long experience,why would it have to be renegotiated with each new donee? What of the comments how the practice could be a revenue source for local PP clinics? How could this be if all they were doing was being reimbursed for their expenses? Also,what was the joke about “wanting a lamborghini”,if all they were doing was breaking even?The balance of your comment is a guilt by association attack on the Center and also has nothing to do about editing changing the meaning of what was said in seven videos. Why defend the indefensible? Why not just say that PP is doing important and vital work which should not be compromised by the callous or insensitive remarks of one or two individuals,put them on paid administrative leave for thirty days,and the whole thing goes away.Oh no,we’ve got to posture and preen because we are The Stage Army of The Good(G.B. Shaw’s happy phrase)so we go down in flames. It IS the sacrament of the Left,a bond between the generations(Lily Tomlin in ‘Grandma’),and must be defended at all costs. It’s the progressive analogue of Kim Davis,i.e.political martyrdom beats intellectual honesty any day of the week.(And is a lot better for fundraising from the true believers!)
You and others(e.g.Kansas Karl) have said that critics of Planned Parenthood over these videos are also against birth control and will only support abstinence based sex ed. I just wanted to point out that many of us DON”T hold those positions. Lack of documentation? I’m just commenting on the respective positions by analyzing the reasoning in their arguments and the logic of what they say. Why does that require “documentation”? If I was you,I would also stay far,far away from the term “founder’s agenda”! I don’t usually mention the blatantly racist agenda of Margaret Sanger,PP’s founder, since that occurred years ago, but since that world view lives on in so many of the organization’s present day supporters,as I vividly demonstrated in my post,it should be noted for the record.
Where did I say that Mr Sutherland opposes any of those things? Your words clearly state otherwise. I said many, not all. Won’t speak for the others.
The big lie in CMP’s effort is saying PP was selling body parts. That’s illegal but people can donate their aborted fetus’ for medical research. That is legal.
Recovering the cost of shipping and handling from the receiver is not selling. I will admit I do not know if PP is gouging as is the custom in commercial S&H charges.
BTW you can add Teddy Roosevelt, Hellen Keller, Winston Churchill, Herbert Hoover, Linus Pauling, W.E.B. DuBois, the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation to the supporters of eugenics to Sanger’s name.
Orphan of The Road-Imagine those sneaky pro-lifers being less that forthright in their 501(c)(3) application! Why,you’d think they were paranoid enough to believe that the chances of the application being granted might be hurt if the IRS knew their ideological leanings!(“Just scratch a right wing conservative hard enough and you find a paranoid lunatic”.Lee G.) How crazy is that! I’ve had it on good authority from Lois Lerner herself that such a thing could never happen.
No need to play semantics, less than forthright is lying.
And the IRS is an bipartisan group who will gladly carry out illegal or unethical plans for R or D. Whether at the beck and call of a president or out of a desire to exercise their power through intimidation.
There needs to be a great culling of 501c charities. Too many are really not charities but are lobbying groups supporting political positions.
I would make an uneducated, gut feeling guess than most are Liberal.
As for the CMR group, they started their foundation on a lie. So I expect less than the whole truth from them.
I know the Sierra Club would sell out for the right price, they’ve done it many times.
As Joseph Goebels said, every big lie has a grain of truth in it.
Something the likes of CMR and Micheal Moore practice religiously.
And as I said originally, PP is full of smarmy, elitists whose tolerance is really a badge of superiority.
We differ on the legitimacy of CMR, not on your personal statements.
Tell me how I am supposed to take a heavily edited gotcha video seriously?
I mean really Dwight, this is something you are actually pointing to try and bolster your flimsy argument against abortion.
Try again council.
Bill Maher,Jon Stewart,Steve Colbert,and Michael Moore never edit anything they do,do they? It’s all shown completely uncut so you know nothing sneaky has gone on like those wily right wingers might do,right?
Are you saying I am supposed to take your above-mentioned list of people seriously? Try again, counsel.
I’m not following you,Dude. Are you saying my list is not to be taken seriously ? Or the people on the list are not to be take seriously ? If it’s the former,please explain. If it’s the latter, all I can say is that I personally don’t take them seriously-and hope you don’t either- but I don’t think anyone can deny that they have huge followings. By the same token,liberals may not take Bill O’Reilly,Glenn Beck, or Ann Coulter seriously but they also have a lot of fans who do and liberals feel,correctly, they need to be called out if they go over the line in terms of accuracy and fair play.
Dwight, obviously this piece has generated a lot of commentary and that’s a good thing. It has taken a few turns away from the topic of Planned Parenthood and I’m still trying to figure out why you responded to lee’s comments on PP (twice) with a rabbit hole tangent relating to the Mainstream Coalition and Jewish voters in Mission Hills but I guess that’s your perogative since it’s your piece.
I admire your passion on the issue of abortion and your view on Planned Parenthood but I question your pragmatism as it relates to the GOP winning the White House in 2016. You wrote above “Letting our beliefs fall by the way side on social issues is… spineless..”. I get that and see your point. However, there are a number of much better issues that the Republicans can hang their hat on and clearly separate themselves from the Democrats ( Jobs, economy, foreign policy, etc) and focusing on Planned Parenthood/abortion is a losing play for your party imho. Polls seem to indicate that a larger percentage of Americans lean towards pro-choice and that number increases among the very important demographic of women voters only. Again, that doesn’t mean that women favor abortion, only that women believe that women’s healthcare decisions should be made by women and not politicians. By putting PP/abortion front and center ( really any social issues) you risk alienating not only independent voters, but moderate Republicans as well. You mentioned yourself above that your moderate Republican friends at the Kansas City Country Club have shunned you because of your outspoken stance on social issues. Can the GOP really afford to turn their backs on fiscally conservative independents who could care less about social issues? I’m not saying change your stance, just that it is a foolish strategy to wave a red flag on this issue when you have so many better ones to focus on. If Cruz and the rest of the right wing radicals choose to shut down the government on the issue of funding Planned Parenthood this fall, it’s another nail in the coffin for the GOP/RNC in the race for the White House. It’s almost gotten to the point where there are now three parties ( Social Conservatives. Moderate Republicans, and Democrats) and letting that division exist and flourish within the GOP is suicidal. Your party is pummeling Hillary on the issue of emails but you are throwing her a life-jacket when you focus on Planned Parenthood.
Just my humble opinion as a political junkie from the left side of the aisle.
This is not a “rabbit hole”! Abortion is the club that the Mainstream Coalition(and its shadowy backers,i.e.Old Guard Republicans) uses to divide our community along ethnic and religious lines.The terrible irony is that it wasn’t social conservatives who were responsible for the restrictive covenants in neighborhoods like Leawood and Mission Hills.It’s not social conservatives who cheerfully maintained religiously restrictive clubs. On the contrary,those responsible for those ugly forms of prejudice are the VERY SAME INDIVIDUALS who served on the boards of Planned Parenthood and The Mainstream Coalition and who were the biggest donors to those groups.I didn’t circulate racist and anti-semitic tracts.It was lawyers and business people I know who left the GOP over abortion because they favored it as a means of population control of minorities they didn’t like.I agree with you whole heartedly that when my party leads with social issues,they lead with their chin. When the subject is taxes and spending, we have a chance of winning the debate.If its God,guns,or gays we will lose every time.However,there are some things so horrific,so repellant that you have to speak out and this ugly,not-so-hidden agenda of Planned Parenthood is one of them. Am I supposed to stay silent when people slyly pitch abortion to me as a way to get rid of black children? (Lee,who is the bigot here?) Am I supposed to let political grafters stir up fear and loathing against me personally by my Jewish neighbors so they can hold on to control of a state senate seat? Or is it more important that I not alienate the Brain Trust in the mens’ grill at the KCCC ?
I watched the CMP videos — I didn’t want to, but I did.
After watching the videos, I can’t see how anyone can ever say “it’s just clumps of cells” again with a straight face. Lab technicians don’t point at “clumps of cells” and exclaim, “Another boy!”
After watching the videos, I can’t see how anyone can say “it’s about women’s rights” again with a straight face. What about the rights of the woman laying dismembered in a pie dish?
Watch the videos.
“You may choose to look away, but you can never say again that you did not know.”
-William Wilberforce
I am so disturbed by the people on this board who are laughing in the face of aborted children, who are actively encouraging, and actually willing to “pay for” women to have their babies ripped apart or burned to death. Isn’t it convenient that you men who have no idea what it is like to feel a baby move from within, to feel that bond and to recognize the humanity of the little person inside from very early on have decided that it is the carriers right to choose. You know nothing. You just claim that the little person you’ve never met (who YOU have called a baby at the fetal stage when that baby is wanted) has no rights.
How convenient. It’s just like a video game; that little person is not real; that little person doesn’t matter; hit the re-set button, and we’ll do this again later when it’s more convenient.
Have any of you met an abortion survivor? Have you spoken with an abortion nurse? Those little people sometimes get born alive, kicking, and crying like kittens. Could you really look at that and deny the humanity?
[It’s perfectly okay to burn to death a 25 week old child, but waterboarding is cruel…. ~idon’tgetit]
Those little humans are just like you and I. We are just bigger, more developed masses of cells. Those less developed people were never going to be anything else. Those masses of cells were never in going to be trees or cats; they were always human. How can you go on kidding yourselves? You’ve seen early sonograms; I know you have. You’ve picked out names and called your child by those names before they were ever born. Some of you have gone through the pain of miscarriage with your wives. Were those just meaningless masses of cells? If so, what made you so sad? If not, why was that child more worthy of saving or mourning than any other child?
What really gets me is why you don’t feel the need to have any say in your very own children’s lives? What’s with this better than thou intelligentsia who wants to sit back and pretend that they are soooooooo compassionate and identify sooooo well with women that they MUST agree with her right to choose? — Well, okay then. Women are right about everything; we should rule the world!!! Yippee!! — What a load?! Why aren’t you protecting your children? Why have you decided that if women won’t protect children, then the children are not worth protecting? Who are you?!
I know. You don’t want the blame. Give the women the call, and you get off scot free… how very clever of you; how very ingenious.
No. You do not get off the hook that easily. This is not all a women’s choice, and it’s not all her burden. You, who promote the killing of children, have blood on your hands. You can look at those videos and those pictures of aborted babies and know that you approved the sacrifice.
How sad for all the children whose mothers AND fathers didn’t care.
Lucky, lucky you that your mother’s didn’t choose otherwise.
Planned Unparenthood, perhaps, is a more appropriate name. With the recent disclosures, including a California Judge who doesn’t think much of Freedom of Speech, it is a fiasco. Look for the Justice Department to go after states that defund it. Planned Parenthood does little to deal with breast and othe women’s cancers, other than refering the process out, and the Affordable Care Act was supposed to solve that. I am not calling for the destruction of Planned Parenthood. I am only saying that I do not want to write the check. If I am paying for your abortion or to a lesser extent your pregnancy prevention, do I have the right to take advantage of it? Hardly! My main objection deals with the Department of Justice, which uses politics to determine judicial indicretion. We have to drag the Justice Department, kicking and screaming, to do their job if it does not fit with their politics.
Great piece. Nice to see someone take a stand. Thank you.