Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Sometimes silence to a simple question is astounding

    Posted by TM Lutas on February 6th, 2019 (All posts by )

    I published a question on Quora.That’s not particularly unusual for me. What was more unusual that I got people following the question (they were interested) but nobody answered the question. That’s not an ordinary occurrence, answers are usually much higher than follows.

    Here’s the question:

    Does your state’s government adequately police against infanticide and how can you tell?

    I would think with the legislation in NY and VA, this would be a question in the hearts and on the lips of pro-lifers everywhere. It’s not like it’s something that the police wouldn’t answer. But nobody seems to want to touch this with a ten-foot pole.

    Why?

     

    23 Responses to “Sometimes silence to a simple question is astounding”

    1. Mrs. Davis Says:

      Not many Pennsylvanians amongst your readers. I live there and the answers are No and Kermit Gosnell.

    2. Roy Kerns Says:

      I thought some today about Pres Trump’s pro-life confrontation last nite and TM Lutus’ question.

      Pro-death folks raise some interesting puzzles. One sorta has to give them some benefit of doubt. How so? Well, one has to assume that they do not simply favor going to a playground or nursery and murdering children. Despite the statement of the GA governor. After all, wouldn’t that leave them with a sickeningly ghoulish perspective on people. Hence, in order to avoid the conclusion that they are seriously dangerous to people in general, one has to think that somehow they have decided unborn people aren’t actually people.

      But there exists not any, zero evidence of any sort for that belief. It is a faith held contrary to every avenue of investigation and has absolutely no support at all.

      Further, that faith leads to absolutely gabberflasting idiocies. According to the pro-death folks if a woman wants her child, it is a person, protected by law, such that causing its death is homicide. But if she doesn’t, the child isn’t a child, but only a mass of tissue. And who cares what the dad thinks. (What if she changes her mind back and forth in indecision? Does the baby snap into and out of humanness at her whim?) According to these same folks, a baby not yet completely delivered is not a baby, but if that baby moves mere millimeters into the world that distance transforms it into a human. (Should we not investigate this power and use it to cure diseases?) It does not seem to bother them that they apply this paradigm to humans only. An unborn cow, for example, is not an unborn cat or unborn horse or a blob of tissue, but a calf.

      The complete absence of any rational, scientific, biological, cultural basis for their belief leads one to realize that they rely on the arbitrary definition of law. That alone salves seared consciences.

      Suppose, then, that one agrees with them that law arbitrarily gets to determine the question of when a baby becomes a human. What about birth qualifies to make that the determining point? Since the choice (sorry) is arbitrary, why not make the determining point two minutes prior to the baby’s 18th birthday? Think of all the problem children that would enable one not to need to continue to deal with. Think of how the kid could be screened for political correctness. (Think this macabre scenario is absurd, beyond ever happening? Right. You don’t know much about 20th C history, learned no lessons from communism having murdered scores, probably hundreds of millions as non-human. The Nazis were pikers in comparison, but did you not learn from them?)

      No. My state (Oklahoma) does not adequately police against infanticide. I can tell because some 13 babies per day are murdered (2017 stats).

    3. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      “Well, one has to assume that they do not simply favor going to a playground or nursery and murdering children. Despite the statement of the GA [did you mean “VA”?-SB] governor. After all, wouldn’t that leave them with a sickeningly ghoulish perspective on people. Hence, in order to avoid the conclusion that they are seriously dangerous to people in general, one has to think that somehow they have decided unborn people aren’t actually people.”

      Given the history of the actions of those who put the power of the State above the rights of any individual [as demonstrated in the 20th Century as mentioned] your initial assumption probably does not hold. Those who worship the State above all, DO regard and assign value to members of our species based on their utility to said State and the political narrative they are pushing. We are not people unless we are of use to the State. Leftists do not consider us as people, countrymen, or worthy of anything but submission to them. A long time ago I invented an acronym, TWANLOC. Those Who Are No Longer Our Countrymen. We do not share the same world view, social contract, or for lack of a better term “sense of morality” with them. To them, the law and Constitution are just words and they have no loyalty to them. We are trapped in the same borders with them, and historically that much difference means that sooner or later there will be extreme and perhaps mutually fatal violence until and unless a new social contract is established. They do not consider us [or for that matter unborn humans] as real people. We are learning that we have to return the same feeling in order to survive.

      As far as my state, Colorado was I believe the second state to approve abortion. We have as of the last election a hard core Socialist/Democrat from the “Peoples Republic of Boulder” as governor. Who incidentally is gay. The Leftist Democrats also hold the majority in both Houses of our Legislature. They are going to push an agenda to make Ocasio-Cortez look like Charles I of Britain. I expect both firearms confiscation and “post-birth abortion” bills to come out of this session. And both be resisted.

      The Republican Party in Colorado largely supported Hillary over Trump and our Republican Senator Gardner views being bipartisan as being more important than the Constitution. We had a Party big-wig come to our TEA Party meeting last month and try to convince us that it was pointless to resist the Democrats for a couple of decades. He was not received well, by the way.

      Noting for the record that I am not a Christian of any flavor, and that I accept that there may be a need to balance the life of the mother against the life of the baby. And that I believe that it is the absolute duty of medical professionals to save all lives that they can and medical technology has advanced light years since the days of Roe-v-Wade. We can save the mother and the child is viable at a far earlier age. I will also note that I lost a son who was 11 years old. Which gives me a slightly different perspective, which I would not wish on others.

      And from what I see, we are going to see a lot more children murdered, before and after birth, at the behest of the government. I suspect I am not alone in that view. It does not do anything to talk about it on Quora because we probably are beyond that stage. TWANLOC.

      Subotai Bahadur

    4. Mike K Says:

      I believe that it is the absolute duty of medical professionals to save all lives that they can and medical technology has advanced light years since the days of Roe-v-Wade.

      In 1968, when I was a second year surgery resident at LA County Hospital, I saw a 1 pound 10 ounce baby in the nursery (called “Path Nursery” where abnormal babies went). She had a duodenal obstruction shown by inability to accept fluids and a “double bubble” X-ray. I took her to surgery and , under local anesthesia, repaired her duodenal obstruction. I did not really expect her to survive as no infant that small had ever survived surgery. We had no infant respirators as they had not yet been invented. After several days we began feeding her through a tiny gastrostomy tube I had placed in her stomach.

      She thrived and, by the time she was 3 pounds, she could kick herself down to the end of the incubator. She went home at 4 1/2 pounds. She is now 51 years old and I have often wondered what happened to her.

      We did not report the case and a year later surgeons in Florida got nation publicity for operating on a 2 pound 2 ounce baby.

      Times have certainly changed. I am prochoice to 20 weeks after seeing a number of disasters from illegal abortions as a medical student.

    5. Sam L. Says:

      I would say no, because my state is run by Democrats.

    6. PenGun Says:

      So abortion is now infanticide? Just making sure I understand the terms.

    7. Phil Ossiferz Stone Says:

      Well, once you accept the gelding of medically healthy boys who are then sent to school in dresses, and parents and faculty and business owners are forced at gunpoint to accept the atrocity for fear of being sued or having your funds cut or what have you, you have pretty well been bludgeoned into a Good German state of numb obedience. The death-on-demand laws, as well as the red flag variety, are merely the Democrats in the pursuit phase of the culture war.

      We have apparently lost the ability to say no to government sponsored atrocity — peacefully, anyway. That leaves two alternatives: armed civil disobedience or slow death by lawfare and ethnic cleansing.

    8. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      The difference between abortion and infanticide is the viability of the child. If with the available medical resources it is possible to save the life of the child, to deliberately allow it to die, or to deliberately kill it, is infanticide.

      The current bills becoming law in Leftist controlled polities in our country deliberately allow the killing by action or neglect of babies after birth.

      A political movement which kills newborns as a matter of policy and convenience is not a tolerable under our Constitution or our social contract. TWANLOC.

      Subotai Bahadur

    9. newrouter Says:

      “So abortion is now infanticide? Just making sure I understand the terms.”

      Yes dumb motherfucker(hey negro expression for the diversity points!!11!!)

    10. Anonymous Says:

      “Yes dumb motherfucker(hey negro expression for the diversity points!!11!!)”

      My search for clarification has come up empty. I’ll have to assume its just a cuter word, that you have taken to using. ;)

    11. Mike-SMO Says:

      Infanticide/abortion is meaningless in the battle to prevent an American “Savita Halapanavar”, who was a blood sacrifice in Ireland several years ago.

      Not too long ago, I ran into a physician’s (sic) forum where the opinion held was that is was ethical and appropriate for a physician to withhold a medical diagnosis from a pregnant woman if that diagnosis would lead to or support the choice for an abortion due to necessary therapy.

      My wife lived in fear of such members of the “Cult of the Magic Belly Fairy” for over a decade. She gave up the day camping with the boys and outlet mall “expeditions” so we would not leave a “civilized” urban area.

      Abortion is a difficult decision but available abortion as a woman’s choice is necessary to prevent the religious sacrifice of women.

      It doesn’t matter much now for me, although there are grand-daughters, so maybe not, but, if you kill mine, I will lay waste to you, your staff, and the entire organization that made the murder possible. Abortion is a medical procedure and none of anyone else’s business. This is not Ireland.

      I’m just saying.

    12. Gavin Longmuir Says:

      “Abortion is a medical procedure and none of anyone else’s business.”

      Only provided that 4 conditions are fulfilled:

      1. The interests of the father of the foetus/baby/child are appropriately respected.

      2. The medical professionals who engage in the activity are properly licensed and are willing participants, not under any official duress. (No Obamacare type requirements for doctors and nurses to perform abortions as part of training & licensing).

      3. The woman is paying for the “medical procedure” out of her own pocket, without any money taken directly or indirectly from taxpayers, such as through the abortion factory known as “Planned Parenthood”; and without money taken from other people via insurance companies. If anyone else is paying directly or indirectly for the “medical procedure”, then it is definitely the business of those payers.

      4. The interests of society as a whole in protecting the vulnerable are appropriately addressed. As a society, we have chosen not to look away when a mother beats her infant child.

      Frankly, saying that this particular medical procedure is “none of anyone else’s business” is just plain silly. If an adult woman wants to have any other discretionary medical procedure (e.g., hip replacement, breast implant), she will find it quite definitely is her insurance company’s business — unless she is one of those rare birds who is paying for the procedure with her own cash. And even if she is paying cash, she will find it is her medical professionals’ business too, as to whether they will agree to perform the discretionary procedure.

    13. Gavin Longmuir Says:

      On Mr. Lutas question as to why the denizens of Quora will not touch the question of infanticide with a ten foot pole — the answer may lie in the extremism of the pro-abortion crowd. They will shout down and demean anyone who tries to have a rational discussion about what is in reality a very difficult question — one on which many of us can see significant pros and cons. But the Absolutists will brook no dissent. Why say anything when the world is full of PenGuns?

    14. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      “Gavin Longmuir Says:
      February 8th, 2019 at 5:33 pm”

      +1

      Subotai Bahadur

    15. PenGun Says:

      Why say anything when the world is full of PenGuns?

      Indeed. I will laugh at what I find funny, and I do that a lot these days.

    16. Mike-SMO Says:

      In response to several:

      The abortion debate centers on immoral teens “Getting it on” when, in fact, the argument is about stopping ALL abortions no matter the circumstances or who “pays”. You know that is true! As near as I can tell from media reports, Ms. Halapnavar wasn’t even pregnant but was allowed to bleed to death lest a “Magic Belly Fairy” might be harmed.

      The restrictions on abortion or an abortion provider (by requiring needless facilities or admitting prividges etc) are being forced no matter who pays. Similarly, the prattle about the “pills are cheap”, ignores the fact that they are (appropriately) prescription medications and the care by a physician isn’t that cheap.

      The extent of medical insurance “coverage” is a bitter joke. The Obama-Care (ACA) forces coverage for conditions such as addictions and sex re-assignment surgery and therapy which are politically favored but truely “elective” processes or conditions. Those are not a “medical” problems and certainly not my problem. But I still get to pay the freight charge.

      And in case you haven’t noticed, you don’t get to refuse to pay income tax fornational programs that you don’t like. Reproductive healthcare is healthcare. You (or I) don’t get to choose the patient’s therapy.

      A couple of friends tried for another child after several miscarrages and nasty bouts of (almost lethal) preclampsia only after they were sure of an abortion backstop if the new-and-improved therapies didn’t work. Neither my late wife nor I would have risked it, but not our choice, nor yours. And “she” should not have had to risk a termination by an “amateur” because there were no experienced providers able to practice in the area because the local busybodies “don’t like abortion”.

      Way back, my wife and youngist son almost died during the delivery. The “Cultists” said, “Don’t get pregnant again, you will not survive”. She responded, “OK. Tie my tubes.” Oh, we can’t do that. You might want to have another child……

      Fortunately, I wasn’t in the room, or I would be writing this from the State Prison. She located a real “physician” for her future health care.

      Your insurance babble is just one more lie to keep women at risk. Just another obstacle in the path…..

      You want your morality/religion, you are welcome to it, Just keep it away from me and mine.

      Don’t want an abortion, then don’t have one.

      You’re just as bad as the progressive/socialist/SJW/snowflakes who can’t resist fucking with other people’s lives.

      Unrestricted “on demand” abortion is the only safe way to protect women from some arrogant assholes who think they have a direct line to God.

    17. Mike K Says:

      The restrictions on abortion or an abortion provider (by requiring needless facilities or admitting prividges etc) are being forced no matter who pays. Similarly, the prattle about the “pills are cheap”, ignores the fact that they are (appropriately) prescription medications and the care by a physician isn’t that cheap.

      Quite a few misstatements here.

      The issue of requiring “needless facilities” is a matter of the problem of complications. I know good OBGYN docs who have perforated uteri during abortions. I don’t know what “pills” are referred to but Planned Parenthood has fought to keep birth control pills prescription only.

      I have no objection to Planned Parenthood but don’t think federal subsidy is appropriate. Medicaid is OK, in my opinion.

      The stuff about “cultists” is fiction. Pre-eclampsia is third trimester. My niece has had two early c-sections due to preeclampsia. She has two healthy sons.

    18. Grurray Says:

      The abortion debate centers on immoral teens “Getting it on” when, in fact, the argument is about stopping ALL abortions no matter the circumstances or who “pays”. You know that is true!

      I had to stop reading here because I didn’t feel like following this argument down they yellow brick road.

    19. Gavin Longmuir Says:

      “Unrestricted “on demand” abortion is the only safe way to protect women from some arrogant assholes who think they have a direct line to God.”

      No, the arrogance is mostly on the part of Abortion Absolutists, whose unreasoning total certainty about the unassailable correctness of their extreme beliefs would be the envy of a Jihadist. Strangely, those extremists automatically seem to assume anyone who does not support all-abortions-all-the-time has to be motivated by religious faith, rather than by the normal human instinct to protect the young and helpless. Abortion Absolutists can’t seem to recognize the difficult moral issues (pro and con) involved in abortion for any thinking human being, religious or not.

      Let’s set aside your embarrassingly intemperate language (“Magic Belly Fairy”), Mike-SMO, and return to Mr. Lutas’ topic: does ‘unrestricted “on demand” abortion’ include infanticide?

    20. Mike K Says:

      Our abortion absolutist friend might be prepared to accept the traditional Japanese concept that the child has no soul until 30 days have passed since birth.

      The intemperate language suggests some sort of obsession.

    21. Mike-SMO Says:

      Sorry about the delay in a reply. I’ve been “away”.

      Actually the concept I had in mind was that the woman is “THE” patient. A real physician treats the definite patient in front of him/her/them in light of her needs and desires.

      The “father” is a consultant in the matter. He may have rights to the resultant “child”, “infant” , but the fetus is in the “mother”. Her needs are the physician’s only concern. None of it is yours.

      By the way, the little yellow Sunday school book [that I have stashed somewhere] said that “Original Sin” comes with birth. A Miscarried fetus, and I believe an aborted fetus, is without sin and first in line at the gateway into heaven.

      It is “messy” and dangerous for women to have one abortion after another since they didn’t use birth control, but I can’t see anyway of stopping that [besides, maybe, education] that would not put other women at risk of death by members of that Cult of The Magic Belly Fairy [e.g. Ms. Savita Halapanavar].

      The only “safe” way to protect women is to have un-restricted access to abortion. That way, there could be no excuse to refuse to do what the patient requires.

      I’d certainly allow that a physician should not be required to work in a facility that performs mostly or only abortions, but if he/she presents him/her self as a “physician”, he/she damn well better do everything the patient in front of them requires, or he/she is mine. If a physician can’t handle that possibility, they should make an immediate career change.

      Teach your children well. Consult. Volunteer. Advocate. But never think that you have any right to intrude into what a woman ultimately decides about her future.

      Oh,about the special needs of a facility that performs abortions….. “Urgent Care’ [Doc-in-a-Box] facilities around here don’t need anything special except a neon sign and a place to park the ambulance; even a walk-in surgical center or dental surgeon. Maybe the doc that you mentioned who perforated a uterus should rent an office closer to a regional trauma center. [We have three 24/7 ER shops in our area backed by surgical theaters. The municipal “bus” [with the blinky lights] has 2 EMS techs on-board and has a firetruck [“rescue pumper”, I am told] escort with a 6-pack for physical assistance.] Maybe if you are in the middle of a Wyoming or North Dakota ranch you might have a point, but most reproductive health centers are usually in cities with hospitals. Nice try, though.

      Not your business.

      Cheers.

    22. Gavin Longmuir Says:

      Mike-SMO — You still did not answer the question: Does the woman’s Divine Right to require a medical professional to abort her “Magic Belly Fairy” include infanticide?

      After all, a new-born baby (Magic Non-Belly Fairy ?) has only the most tenuous grasp on life, and will certainly die unless given support.

      In Darwinian terms, the vulnerability of babies & infants probably explains why normal people feel protective towards babies and infants. Those individuals who did not have protective feelings for the young would not successfully raise progeny, and would over time have been eliminated from the gene pool.

    23. Mike K Says:

      The only “safe” way to protect women is to have un-restricted access to abortion. That way, there could be no excuse to refuse to do what the patient requires.

      Why stop at birth ? I’m sure there are people you consider not worth the oxygen they use.

      Soylent Green ? This is the only country besides China, and they are having a population crash, that allows abortions to birth.