Archive for February 4, 2011

When you look at the planned parenthood and the Kermit Gosnell stories you might wonder why the left is so determined to counter them.

With New Jersey poised to investigate the Planned parenthood location that advised underage girls on abortion, and multiple locations in Virginia now revealed one would think the left would back away from such defenses, particularly with the details of Kermit Gosnell’s house of horrors case still in play (although if you look at the national media you would think it was a blip on the screen.)

Yet here is President Obama’s administration withholding abortion statistics for the first time in 40 years and Soros and company holding conference calls to find a united line concerning the Planned Parenthood revelations:

Instead of focusing on the fact that there is an organization who turned a blind eye to child sex-trafficking, an organization that receives forced federal funding, the group of senior fellows ostensibly chose the route which affords zero defense of women, born or unborn, thereby saving them from compromising their female-hostile ideologies: attack Lila Rose. These outlets don’t see the insanity in feigning disgust that the racket was exposed, not that it occurred at all.

The majority of the call was spent discussing ways to discredit Rose because of her funding. They surmise that some group which donates to her pro-life magazine is a group donated to by a group given money by the Koch Brothers. So says people who just cashed a $1 million-dollar check from George Soros.

Since what was done on the tapes clearly stepped over the line, why not just express outrage, and urge Planned Parenthood to be more careful in the future in such cases?

Because you can’t undermine western civilization without undermining life.

As science continues to make the case that the unborn child is not just a mass of tissue and makes viability earlier and earlier it becomes imperative for the left to counter the culture of life.

Judeao-Christian culture is built on the value and the rights of the individual, unless that is undermined you can’t go anywhere else.

Once you manage to get a society to decide that its weakest members are not worthy of life as a matter of narcissistic convenience then all the rest becomes easy.

You can deny care to the elderly , even euthanize them in order to save money. You can arbitrarily decide if a life is “worth living” or not based on a standard not held by the person who decides.

You can reward narcissism and strip people of their self-respect and dignity, maintaining that they should be wards of the state rather than the makers of their own destiny, and once they are subject to the state, if they are no longer serving it, are disposable.

Whole neighborhoods can be abandoned to crime and lawlessness that those same elites would reject for themselves, after all why waste the states valuable resources on mere vassals?

Life is the key, once you devalue human life, once you have an excuse not to care, the second excuse becomes extremely easy.

This is why the far left will always defend abortion in general and Planned Parenthood to the hilt, for without the culture of death the left’s worldview crumbles to dust.

Advertisements

Yglesias links and quotes Ayaan Hirsi Ali on what is coming in Egypt

Ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali warns us to be very afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power in Egypt. And maybe she’s right. But it’s difficult to take her word for it. After all, she thinks that Islam in general needs to be extirpated from the planet:

He then quotes her piece, bolding certain bits:

“I’ll tell you why: because Islam is the new fascism. Just like Nazism started with Hitler’s vision, the Islamic vision is a caliphate – a society ruled by Sharia law – in which women who have sex before marriage are stoned to death, homosexuals are beaten, and apostates like me are killed. Sharia law is as inimical to liberal democracy as Nazism. Young Muslims need to be persuaded that the vision of the Prophet Mohammed is a bad one, and you aren’t going to get that in Islamic faith schools.”

Now of course bolding a piece is meant to draw your eyes to the bolded section and to avoid the unbolded sections. Yglesias having a liberal audience is trying to stress Ali “intolerance”. How dare she be intolerant of Islam. Now lets look at the same piece with different words bolded:

I’ll tell you why: because Islam is the new fascism. Just like Nazism started with Hitler’s vision, the Islamic vision is a caliphate – a society ruled by Sharia law – in which women who have sex before marriage are stoned to death, homosexuals are beaten, and apostates like me are killed. Sharia law is as inimical to liberal democracy as Nazism. Young Muslims need to be persuaded that the vision of the Prophet Mohammed is a bad one, and you aren’t going to get that in Islamic faith schools.”

Now I would think that these things about Islam and Sharia law would be significant to liberals. After all if I as a believing Roman Catholic am repressive because I oppose sex before marriage, gay marriage and believe in God, how much more would they oppose Sharia, which stones women, beats (and kills) gays and slays apostates.

But we can’t stress these facts, because it promotes “intolerance of Islam”. Maybe it’s just me but I think we shouldn’t tolerate Sharia law, stoning of women, beating of gays, and killing of apostates.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali “intolerance” of Islam is based on a standard of Islam’s actions. Yglesias critique of Ali and defense of Islam is based on a standards of her thoughts.

That to me is the perfect illustration of how liberalism works.