You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘abortion’ category.


You just gotta love Camille Paglia. Well, maybe not all the time, but her writing is succinct and well reasoned; even if you don’t agree with the central thesis of whatever piece you happen to be reading. I’m quite sure that as often as I’ve shaken my head in amazement at her stances, some of her liberal friends find themselves in the same boat. Her article from last Thursday is a great example of what I mean. I’m quite sure she’s pissed off more than a few of her fellow abortion rights comrades by highlighting their religious fervor towards the issue of abortion, much the same way the pro-choice movement derides those of a more traditional religious viewpoint. I’ll give her this much; she’s consistent and declares herself to be more courageous than her fellow abortion rights supporters who hide behind what she calls the “cowardly euphemism” term of “pro-choice.” Courageous indeed.

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt...

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt…

Paglia was writing about the unfortunate slip of the tongue of Hillary the Great, the anointed democrat nominee. (Can nominee and anointed be used in the same sentence?) Was Hillary trying to soften her abortion stance, hoping to move as far to the right as Bernie will allow her, or was this actually a deep rooted conviction from a woman who has really only shown a deep rooted conviction for anything that might benefit Hillary? Was Hillary simply confused when she referred to the fetus as an “unborn person,” quite possibly recalling her junior high school biology lessons where I and millions of other eager yet empty headed youngsters first learned that when a woman gets pregnant, she’s carrying a human child and not a puppy, a goldfish or a snail? How dare she humanize a fetus? Did she possibly search Webster’s online: “an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically :  a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth.” Say what you will, but I won’t be shaken from the certainty that you’re killing something that was always human. It’s biology you see.

It’s quite amazing, really, and somewhat depressing that young women are being taught that they’re not carrying anything that even remotely looks like their own baby pictures. If you don’t humanize it, it’s easier to kill it. And heaven forbid someone offers you a chance to look at the face of your “choice” via any type of ultra-sound so you can see just what you’re about to tear to pieces. What kind of idiot provides a woman with that kind of clarity? But hey, Hillary redeemed herself by assuring those so offended by the term “unborn person” (you know, a human child) that the unborn don’t have any constitutional rights anyway. So there.

Camille, Like Hillary, is quite sure that the execution of the unwanted gestating child is supported without restriction under the fourteenth amendment. And Camille does pat her self on the back quite often, proud that she has always been consistent with respect to the sanctity of life, and feels that her support of abortion on demand equals her support for the death penalty of those convicted of heinous crimes. She tells us that she feels that pro-choice Democrats have become “callous and extreme” about abortion. How you can, in the same breath, find that abortion is protected by the fourteenth amendment which gives equal protection to all persons under the law and then equate an innocent unborn person with a convicted murderer is beyond me. And to call others callous in the process. But such is the life of an ardent, courageous “pro-abortion supporter” I guess.

Troubling even more is that she glances over her support for Margaret Sanger, noting only in passing Sanger and Planned Parenthood’s origins promoting eugenics; she never mentions the fact that much of the purification of the gene pool was aimed at blacks. No, Camille became disillusioned over Planned Parenthood when she realized it became a “covert arm of the democrat party.” And leaves it at that. Not because Planned Parenthood and the democrat party are systematically killing unborn not-quite-human-victims, many of them black mind you, but because they are a “covert arm of the democrat party.” Which of course, is news to no one at all.

At least Camille points out that nature oppresses women in far greater ways than men do. But the left doesn’t quite go for biology; see the entry above from Webster’s. In fact, if they can’t find someone to blame, they can’t create more victims. Like Camille, I too consider myself quite libertarian, leaning more conservative. And yes, my own views on abortion frustrate the bejeebus out of everyone. Want to have an abortion? Go ahead. On your own dime. With your own child, not mine. Explain it to your God, or Gaia, or whatever you call your conscience, but leave me out hell out of it. I have no right to tell any woman who is not carrying my child what she has to do with her body. Sorry friends, I have always felt that way. I have no more right to control you than you have to control me. But that’s not good enough for second or third wave feminism. What was once a movement about reproductive rights became sex without consequence; the choice at the front end of the act de-coupled from the consequence of that “choice.” And somehow, you decided the government needs to get me involved. Either I pay for your abortion or pay for your offspring. I got just as sick of the feminist movement over abortion as Camille seems to be. And of course, I’m told I hate women because of it. Camille, you dammed misogynist. It appears that feminism was just a change in how women could fund their victimization due to the burden of pregnancy. Being supported by a man is heinous; having his financial support coerced from him and filtered through the government; a-okay.

It’s interesting to note that she brings up what she feels were the “flimsy and overblown” charges leveled against Clarence Thomas. Interesting in the fact that during the same period, many young men like myself were ardent supporters of equal opportunities for women; even though we were constantly subjected to harangues of how evil men were as we stood should to shoulder with those slinging these arrows. I was concerned for my sisters (biological!) and the future Ms. Messydesk and possible daughters. But I was raised to be considerate of women; yes we were taught to pull out the chairs at the table, open doors, give up our seats on the bus. And more often, I was looked upon with derision for those actions, even to the point of being publically berated on more than one occasion. Maybe it isn’t biology that second and third wavers were struggling with, maybe it was friggin’ manners. Who knows? But it became tedious. I would always be the enemy and they were dammed sure to let me know, no matter how many signs I held up side-by-side with them. Or maybe it was because I expected them to become truly self-sufficient. And called them on it.

To be consistent, Camille should also discuss, not only how feminism misses the point on the biology of women, but also how feminism has declared war on the biology of men. Fatherhood is a joke; a quaint but antiquated social construct. No need for a man to make a child anymore. A strong father figure in the home is a vanishing breed. Any of the adjectives once used to describe the rugged male individual that women used to long for and men wanted to be like were discarded long before the Marlboro man choked out his last cigarette. No, we were now being forced to take sensitivity classes, wear pregnancy suits for a whole day, quizzed by our prospective paramours on whether we are afraid to cry, told to be less introspective and more talkative and for god sakes, take off those sweats and put on some dammed skinny jeans. Emasculation of the American male is really the goal here. This is no longer about equal opportunity, to raise women to their potential. No, the gap between the sexes, regardless of the dictates of biology like muscle mass and bone structures, uteri or prostate glands, could only be diminished by disparaging those traits that made males uniquely, biologically male. From Marlboro man to pajama boy in less than a generation.

But it’s even worse for those runny-nosed little heathens, boys, dealing with that toxic soup of the evil testosterone while they try to sit still in class, dreaming of pulling on that mesmerizing, swaying pony tail at the desk ahead of them. Society now treats them as predators in waiting, busted for a simple hug or stolen kiss on the playground, labeling them as serial sex abusers long before they develop the slightest wisp of pubic hair. Great cottage industries have grow up around diagnosing little boys as damaged little girls who might just be saved if we drug the natural, biological tendencies out of them and exchange their Tonka trucks for Barbie’s dream corvette or pry GI Joe from their hands, replaced by any one of the My Little Ponies. We wonder why children are facing dilemmas about their sexuality in far greater numbers; because we can’t face biology and project our inability to come to grips with it upon those who are currently at that stage in their lives when it has the most emotional and physical impact. Why do we teach little girls to fear and hate little boys and little boys to hate themselves. Go ahead; deny it if it helps you sleep better at night. Maybe you’re courageous too, like Camille.

We’ll never settle the debate over abortion. Unfortunately, we’ll never even agree to disagree. Some of us believe life starts at conception. Others believe life begins when society decides it does. Like maybe when you make it home from the hospital. In any event, feminism has moved to a place where I can no longer recognize why I, as a male, believed in it so strongly when I was younger. I still believe my daughters should have every opportunity to try anything they are capable of. And I also believe that their success should not be predicated on the demonization of the other half of the species. Feminist can deny their biology all they’d like; to each his or her own. But the issue still remains that what I see as the brand of feminism displayed today is nothing more than vitriol, self-loathing and an intense feeling of, maybe a celebration of victimhood. And if abortion is their Holy Grail, we should also note that biology includes death; the death of over 50 million babies aborted since Roe V. Wade. Mom went to Planned Parenthood and only brought back a tee shirt.

So like Camille, I’ve become quite disillusioned with feminism. I will however leave you with one last comment. If you can celebrate the death of your unborn child, then struggling with biology is likely not the only thing we can’t agree to disagree on.


Infamous molar-yanker, one Dr. Walter Palmer, DDS has returned to work. It’s been six weeks since our esteemed practitioner has dared to step foot into his place of business, probably to even show his face to the world. The sudden announcement of his return seemed to catch protestors off-guard, as they were far outnumbered by the media eager to push this story as far as they can. To what end? I’ve never quite understood the allure of hunting, from the ridiculous vermin that continue to build their frustrating nests in the corners of my garage, to the magnificent beasts that roam the wild fields of Africa. Killing for sport doesn’t quite seem, well, too human of us. Oh, I know quite a few hunters, had quite a few in the family. Even had the occasional deer or moose steak. Not sure what attracted my family to the sport but I never cared to find out. I never cared to ask either. There were no deer heads mounted in our home; no stuffed birds or the like. At least those I knew who enjoyed the sport, for whatever reason, made it a point to keep the freezers of their friends and families well stocked with wild meat. So it was when I was growing up.

Any chance you're going to take a bus to another location later?

Any chance you’re going to take a bus to another location later?

Even though the protests have dwindled some, I seriously doubt that Dr. sharpshooter will ever live this down. It may very well have been his boyhood dream, stalking the wild animals of Africa with his trusty bow; a dream that has now become a nightmare. I’m not sure how this plays out; hunting is still legal, although it’s unclear if this particular hunt was. Zimbabwe had requested extradition of the good dentist. And his guide will go on trial later this month. Fortunately for Dr. Robinhood of Bloomington, Zimbabwe has thought better of their demand for they fear it could jeopardize the very hunting industry that supports over 800,000 Zimbabwean families. There is, after all, a profit to be made in death. But I’m sure that given the beauty and majesty of the victim, this will not die down for Dr. Palmer. Animal rights activists have a long memory. How long will his patients be willing to cross their lines just to have their teeth cleaned? How long can these protests last?

All because this one human decided that it would be his right to kill.

Coincidentally, there is another medical office just sixteen minutes northeast of Dr. Palmer’s practice. No disturbances were reported there yesterday. It’s business as usual for the practitioners of this medical art. The compound bow has been replaced by the scalpel and the forceps. Just as deadly to be sure. But here, other magnificent creatures die daily to no alarm of anyone in the Minneapolis suburbs. Dr. Palmer had a guide; here, the hired hands cover their faces with surgical masks.

All because one human decided that it would be her right to kill.

For shame, conflating the death of the noble beast with that of a clump of pesky cells destined to be a human. But this is where we have come in our evolution. Death for sport, death for convenience; it all looks the same to me.

Sorry to be terse, but my patience is gone. I spent most of my life that odd conservative, one who was willing to look the other way to support a woman’s right to choose. I just couldn’t justify how I had the right to demand that a woman have a child against her wishes while claiming to support the rights of the individual. I struggled with my own shame, my own dilemma that yes, I believed a human life was being taken. But I had no right to interfere, no right or justification to intercede. Therefore, it was easier to just ignore it, go along with my life knowing that I wasn’t complicit, that someone else would have to live with the guilt or the shame or whatever moral disruption follows the event. Forcing a woman to deliver a baby was something I could never imagine as a free man, a man of conscience, a man dedicated to the free will of the individual.

But try as I might, I could get no sympathies or concessions from either entrenched side of the argument. To my conservative friends I was a traitor; to my liberal friends, I hate women. Pure and simple; I was wrong at either turn. That was okay; I never found myself having to make that decision, to be part of it. Too monumental to be made from outside of those actually involved. I was okay if I was left out of it; I would never put a woman in that position and would never let myself get into that position either. Period. Neat how being responsible works. Or so I thought.

There are many like me, believe it or not. But we are tired. We are being forced, against our wishes, to choose between two factions who wish to never close the divide. Compromise has been lost; so it has with me. If I were a willing expectant father, her right to kill my unborn child trumps my desire to be that father. Why? If I decide to walk away, her right to make me responsible until well into that child’s adulthood is enforced as well. Three people involved, only one has rights. Why?

I started to feel queasy knowing that I was paying for these procedures. Of course, I couldn’t make that argument known, lest I be labeled a racist, hater, misogynist et al. And of course, I wasn’t paying for the procedure I was told. Even though I’m not an idiot and like the majority of the population, I know damned well what’s going on with my tax dollars. Safe and rare was our mantra then. Same day service, best price in town is the new motto. How many children were murdered on the day Cecil was struck by the arrow on the African plain? Why none of course. These aren’t babies, they certainly aren’t human and besides, they’re not fully alive until they reach the crib in the nursery at home. So many ways to argue for death; so many reasons to justify giving up on our humanity.

You finally lost me with the Planned Dismemberment videos. I was watching a news show late one night and a supporter of Planned Infanticide had decided that she wasn’t going to speak on the subject at all because she was just going to be labeled a baby-killer. No one had called her that. Maybe it was a moment of clarity on her part, I don’t know. But I listened as she justified the existence of Planned Non-Parenthood and skirted the issue of partial birth abortion. How wonderful she posited, that something good could come from something so tragic like an abortion. She quickly caught herself; tragic. Indeed. If these children are being harvested, and they are, it is precisely because they are human. And for most of the tissue to be viable, the “donor” has to be alive our mere seconds dead. Of course, she hasn’t seen any of the videos, claiming they were heavily edited. Well, I saw them in their entirety. She’s not even a good liar, but what would one expect from someone who feels no pang of conscience knowing that children are indeed being left to die on the tables of the exam room or dissected while their “non-human” hearts are still beating. It wasn’t the videos themselves mind you; it was the mindless, unwavering mantra of “it’s her right” that finally pissed me off. If you can’t be disturbed by the sale of dismembered human children, we no longer need to have a discussion.

No, you had your chances. All I ever asked for was to keep the murder of your children to yourself. But you decided I need to pay; pay to have them killed or pay to have them fed until they’re twenty-eight. Mine or not. Somehow a woman’s right to choose leapt forward from the act of procreation to the consequences of it, and everyone but she is responsible for her actions. You only had to compromise with me, to be honest, to be introspective, to be moral. You failed.

It will be interesting to see how long Dr. Palmer has to hide his face for the killing of a wild creature on the plains of Africa. And for every day that the protestors make his life a living hell, another medical office, not twenty minutes away, will continue to churn out it’s product, whatever you want to call it, how ever you want to justify it, killing for the sake of killing because one more woman decided it was her right to do so.


Never liked crunchy peanut butter; always went for the creamy style. I guess the taste may be the same when you get down to it; after all, creamy is just the peanut ground to a finer texture, no hint of the shape or physical definition of the aforementioned peanut. Totally unidentifiable at that point. Of course, there are those who just swear by the texture, relishing in the remaining crunchy bits of peanuts that escaped the factory-grade grinding wheels that were set just so, leaving the sought-after bits and pieces they desire in their PB&Js.

Was this a difficult choice?

Was this a difficult choice?

Dr. Gatter is hawking her own less crunchy “bits and pieces”. She instructs her would-be customers that she can have her factory alter their manufacturing process to a “less crunchy” methodology, leaving the buyer with a product that’s far more intact, if that’s what they prefer. Wouldn’t it be nice if she was only discussing the lifeless, lowly peanut? But alas, like those who are defending her, she sees no more value in a human life or human dignity than she sees in a peanut. This is, remember, the definition of women’s health. Creamy or crunchy. A woman’s right to choose.

The abortion debate always brings out the worst in both sides of the question. No movement. No collaboration, no compromise. You either support this heinous procedure or you hate women. Simple. Or, if you support any reasonable approach to restraining abortion, you get blasted by both sides; defending murder, not protecting life; a msyoginist who wants women pregnant but in the kitchen makin’ those sammiches. Whether either extreme end of the spectrum wants to believe it or not, there are a vast number of people who find abortion abhorrent, see it as taking an innocent life but quite possibly, something that they would continue to accept under narrow circumstances. For many of us, it’s about saving a woman’s life; not her life style. Of course, we’re not much appreciated by either side.

If it wasn’t so disturbing a topic, the recent Planned Parenthood revelations about selling broken babies would illuminate where we stand on the scale of humanity and simple dignity. I scour the papers, web and blogs quite a bit and the conversations about the recently released videos are downright depressing. Both sides have dug in deep but the debate is somewhat slightly skewed. Believe it or not, the majority of the debates end up wandering around the validity of the video; was this a set up? Was the video edited or doctored? Was she taken out of context? “This group is out to get Planned Parenthood” some say, “so anything they produce or present is slanted and not to be believed.” It’s almost as if they want you to believe that someone had a gun to her head, that she had a written script in front of her, a coerced confession as it were, all fake, not real. This doesn’t really go on in today’s society. Truth is, I don’t know exactly what the law says in great detail about trafficking in human body parts, but if you’re standing so close to the legal line that you could be pushed over it by the slightest breeze, then maybe your intentions aren’t as pure as you would have us all believe.

At this point, the validity of the video is moot. Whether this doctor or the one previously recorded knew they were being recorded (unfair!) or not only changes the narrative away from the procedure that needs to be addressed out in the open. How anyone can justify pulling a live child out of the womb, stopping at the point of leaving the head inside so one can puncture the skull, suck out the brains and then crush the skull to make the final removal easier, well that justification is hard for me to accept.

Defenders of Planned Infanticide want to keep the focus on the veracity of the video, not about the horror of the procedure that started the whole conversation to begin with. And as deeply as they study this video, looking for any edits, trying to put words or statements in “context”, maybe they should be forced to view one other video in greater detail. (Please do not click this link lightly; it is very disturbing. I apologize for the horrific scene.) This is the video that should be discussed on the nightly news, in every home, in legislative bodies. Many who support this procedure have never seen this, never taken the time to see exactly what it is they are asking me and others like me to accept. And yet, they know this is out there, know the horror of it, but chastise me, call me a hater because I am repulsed by it. Please tell me that we are, as a race, as humans, far better than this type of abomination.

If you I and cannot agree that this is a barbaric way to end the life of a human baby, then we will certainly never be able agree on when that life began in the first place. Show some humanity. In fact, it should be easier than choosing your favorite brand of peanut butter.


Your opinion on abortion obviously says a lot about your political leanings.  Your view on the trial of “Dr.” Kermit Gosnell says a hell of a lot more about your humanity.  The silence of those on the left, especially those in the media speaks volumes about the depravity that supposes itself to be the mainstream of enlightened thought in the country today.  If true, it doesn’t bode well for the future of this country, or civilization for that matter.  Are we truly heading towards a world where the body parts of our infant offspring are kept in a freezer like some macabre trophy case?  Let us hope not.

Gosnell's tropy case...

Gosnell’s tropy case…

Marc Lamont Hill finally admitted publicly the left’s desire to protect their sacrosanct position at the expense of their decency.  On a Huffington Post live segment he explained the media’s willingness to abdicate their decency and journalistic responsibilities in deference to their abortion preference stating For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.”  If we could get that type of honesty on abortion to begin with, we might possibly come to a position that, while not perfect from either viewpoint, closes the emotionally charged gap that currently divides us as a society.  Or am I too Pollyannaish on this?

From Peter Singer to Barbara Boxer, the left sees no issue with killing fully formed humans outside the womb, ostensibly to keep abortion rights protected.  If your stance is, like Boxer’s,  that life begins when your family decides to take the baby home from the hospital, then Gosnell’s infanticide factory doesn’t bother you one bit.  Life doesn’t begin at conception for the left.  Life and the right to it, starts in the bassinet at home and not a moment sooner.  And quite possibly for some, even later than that.  So, for the political left and the media, there’s no story here other than an attack on a woman’s constitutionally protected Roe vs. Wade given right to an abortion.  Move along folks, nothing to see here.

Exactly who are they afraid of?  This story does nothing to move those, Like Boxer, who are willing to look the other way while these atrocities occur.  It certainly doesn’t change the stance of those on the right who are against abortion at anytime in the gestational period.  No, the concern is for those who harbor a mixed conscience on this as well as those who really don’t care to take a stand one way or another.   It’s these folks who will swing the pendulum in whatever direction they see fit once they are motivated to take a position.  And the fear on the left is that people will start seeing, at least this procedure, for what it truly is: an atrocity and a crime against humanity.  Of course, the left fears that any reasonable restrictions on abortion will lead to momentum for a total ban on the procedure, whatever the gestational period.

How will they defend their stance from the fallout of this trial?  They hope to ignore it, almost to the point of covering it up.  Failure to report on this is in itself, supporting, aiding and abetting a procedure that should be banned in almost any sane, civilized society.  How they can defend this is beyond my comprehension.  It’s more than a lack of shame isn’t it?  Maybe it’s because their abortion zealotry deafens them to the screams of anguish of the victims, the sound that permeates the dreams and conscience of intern Ashley Baldwin who testified to hearing the last pitiful sound of one of the truly innocent.   At that age, the child certainly doesn’t have the cognitive abilities to reason what is about to happen.  The screech must surely have been an autonomic response to the pain of being decapitated alive.

This is what the left seeks to defend.  This is what they choose to ignore.  This is what the women who request this procedure sentence their unwanted offspring to.  For her, it’s convenient.  For others, it’s politically expedient.  For the rest of us, it’s horrifying and hopefully, an impetus for deep soul searching and a call to stand up to defend our own humanity.


I must confess, the subject of abortion causes an internal debate within my mind much like the debate that rages in the public at large.  Convinced that I do not have the right to tell anyone what he or she can or cannot do with their body clashes against my belief that it’s just morally wrong, that we are in fact taking the life of another and usually for nothing more than mere convenience.  Of course, my stance pleases neither my conservative friends nor those of the liberal persuasion.  All I ask is for personal responsibility and truth.  The truth is, you’re ending a human life.  Call it a clump of inconvenient cells if it helps you sleep at night, but the other truth is that the original choice, having sex in the first place, brought you to the point of making the “choice” you claim actually defines a woman’s reproductive rights.

The face that believes children born alive have no human rights...

The face that believes children born alive have no human rights…

The fact that no one wants to take responsibility for his or her actions is key here.  I’m pregnant; I don’t wish to be held responsible.  If I cannot dispose of it, then society at large should pay for it.  If you’re not willing to adopt my unwanted progeny, you shouldn’t complain when I kill it, even if I am asking you to finance its death.  My stance has always been that of a strict constructionist; I have no right to dictate that a woman should carry a baby.  I’ve held that belief with a heavy heart for years, knowing full well that children were being slaughtered for the crime of merely developing in the womb.  At the very least, I believed that the matter should have been resolved at the state level, that the Supreme Court had no standing when it ruled on Roe.  Yes, I was a reliable un-enthusiastic supporter of a woman’s right to choose based on my deep respect for self-determination set forth in the Constitution.  The  fact that I am being coerced to finance either outcome resulting from a behavior that most supporters wish to avoid responsibility for has always left me with a bitter taste in my mouth.  I no longer have the stomach for the lies coming from the left.  I can no longer defend what I truly believe to be the slaughter of innocents.

I posted last year about the slippery slope of abortion.  It seems that those who labeled me as alarmist were disingenuous.  I thought for a time they were just mistaken, but I see now that they’re not idiots, they know exactly what they are doing.  It used to be that the abortion argument centered on trying to define when life begins.  Where in the Constitution does the Roe decision find the right to infanticide? Now that Planned Parenthood has come out in support of killing children who are surviving outside the womb, I am alarmist no more.  This is what the left has evolved into.  The right to murder your children.

I thought we would never be desensitized enough to get to this point.  Again, I was wrong.  Imagine an infant, still startled by the birth process, eyes fluttering against the hard glare of institutional fluorescents in the delivery room.  As she gathers the strength in her lungs to vocalize her dissatisfaction with her welcome, she is placed on a cold sterile table, rolled over on her stomach so a pair of surgical shears can open the base of her skull to snip her spinal column.  Past the stage of viability, her 8-pound-plus body is too large for the shoebox she is placed in, legs and arms hanging over the side but no longer wiggling as her life ebbs away.  The doctor on trial for performing this feat of humanity is claiming in his defense that these were legal abortions, and of course, prosecuting him is racist.  Never mind that the majority of the children that he killed in this way were minorities, as were the women he fleeced and damaged in the process.  His claim that the children were delivered dead does not stand.  Why would they sever the spinal cords of dead children?  The details are horrifying; even the staff were routinely killing viable infants, born alive only to be murdered at the request of the doctor and the women who paid him to exercise their choice.

Is this really what women mean when they say “my right to choose?”  Is this a choice they can live with the rest of their lives?

Enter your email address and I'll let you know when I post!

Join 267 other followers

hey, pick a topic

Other stuff you gotta see…

J.A.Paquette

Author, Blogger, Father

Chicks On The Right

totally random and unconnected thoughts...

GraniteGrok

totally random and unconnected thoughts...

PJ Media

totally random and unconnected thoughts...

Moonbattery

totally random and unconnected thoughts...

The Gateway Pundit

totally random and unconnected thoughts...

CanadaFreePress.Com

totally random and unconnected thoughts...

ExposeTheMedia.com

Just another WordPress.com site