Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

Recommended Photo Store
 
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
 
 
 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Richard Mourdock open thread

    Posted by TM Lutas on October 25th, 2012 (All posts by )

    Today I put up two Mourdock signs on my property (I live on a corner)

     

    13 Responses to “Richard Mourdock open thread”

    1. Sgt. Mom Says:

      I just unsubscribed from John Scalzi. I found his current post on the matter to be a sickening over-simplification, and to be as vicious as it was petty.

    2. Jonathan Says:

      Scalzi’s piece is rhetorically clever but essentially a straw-man argument, or maybe it should be called a straw-hominem argument. Naturally, he imputes bad motives to the guy he claims to be arguing against.

      There ought to be a cautionary term to identify people who write engagingly but who make bombastic yet fallacious or logically weak arguments. How about Sullivanite?

    3. Michael Kennedy Says:

      I’d never heard of him so I used Google to see what you were referring to. It is a nasty column. Mourdock said nothing about the rape victim. He said too much but it was all about the fetus.

      Akin was stupider but “legitimate rape” meant, to me, forcible rape as opposed to statutory.

      The left is desperate to get abortion into the election. I’m pro-choice but think these examples are of nasty politicians, not religion. Akin was dumb, Mourdock was foolish to be honest in a profession that is rarely honest and usually ill advised to be so.

    4. John Says:

      I don’t know a lot about the guy, but I’ve been inclined to vote for him and intending to do some research on him, because of all the big glossy smear pieces I’ve been getting in the mail. They come pretty much everyday… here’s the one that came this morning…

      Dark red to light orange gradient background, guy in a suit — presumably Mourdock, set against this background looking like the devil with flames behind him, he is clearly a dark evil man. He glares with his arms crossed at the only colorful part of the page — a multi ethnic group of school children caressing a globe, being cut in half by giant scissors…

      The text isn’t much better, and on the whole encourages me to vote for this guy at a gut level… So much for the gut level, time to find out what his positions really are…

    5. PenGun Says:

      Oh come on TM. The guy is not even consistent from week to week.

    6. PenGun Says:

      It’s over. Meat Loaf just endorsed Romney.

    7. TM Lutas Says:

      Mourdock was the fellow who went all the way to the Supremes to block the bailouts because union debts were jumped ahead of bondholders. He managed two funds that were affected. He has my vote. He sells himself as a straight shooter, somebody who is not going to bend just because it was politically convenient. He certainly demonstrated it with his abortion commentary.

      PenGun – Whatever did you hear about Richard Mourdock that paints him as a flip flopper?

    8. grey eagle Says:

      Reading the news it seems to me that when a woman gets raped and pregnant that liberals want to kill the wrong person. If death is the penalty, then they should kill the rapist. Killing the baby is wrongly punishing the child for the sins of the father.

      Sending a rapist to prison is like sending him to heaven. He will spend the best part of his life raping fellow inmates.

    9. Sgt. Mom Says:

      The thing is that a pregnancy resulting from a rape is a horrible, traumatic situation, all the way around, for which there is no very satisfactory resolution, no matter how it comes down; brutalize a woman who has already been brutalized once already, or essentially kill an innocent proto-human being. Mr. Mourdock was attempting to articulate something of this – and Scalzi just leaped into constructing a disgusting straw edifice and began blasting away.

    10. Louis Wheeler Says:

      Let’s say that you are in a bad situation due to no fault of your own. What you do about the situation defines your morality. Should you choose murder as part of your solution? Be careful, because this would apply to more than just abortion. Anyone who feels wronged could grasp at this straw.

    11. tomw Says:

      And God mad man in His image…

      Making public a very personal feeling is taken as the introduction of legislation by the demagogues.

      Where is the bill Mourdock is proposing? Oh, there isn’t one.

      Fine. Shut up.

      tom

    12. John in KC Says:

      Pen,

      Mr. Loaf endorsing Mitt Romney may not be near as significant as Madonna being booed onstage for slamming Romney by her own peeps. That’s a sea change.

    13. TMLutas Says:

      Grey Eagle – As I think on it more, I view it as a sort of weird bill of attainder. We may not be able to punish the rapist reliably but boy can we get the kid every time.

      Even Scalzi admits that the large majority of women who are raped and pregnant do not kill their unborn. He declines to try to get inside their heads though. Why is their voice unworthy of an article? Why not the child’s point of view?

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.