« "Best Picture" Award | Main | 2800 Miles Too Far Away »

March 02, 2006


Here is a chilling editorial about abortion from the Gamecock, the student newspaper of the University of South Carolina. What is so startling about it is that it in no way attempts to veil the fact that many believe that abortion for convenience sake is perfectly ok. Sorry for the long url.


“…i spoke for about an hour followed by more than an hour of lively interactive Q and A with pro-choice students. What could be more fun…”

I thought I’d mention something I’ve been thinking about for a while now. I’ve noticed how prolifers repeatedly refer to their job as “fun”. Steve does it here in this posting and Scott K does it quite a bit too. In one of the tape lecture series (available from STR), after winding some clever argument, Scott remarks with a smile something like, “you see how this is going to be fun tonight ladies and gentlemen.”

Well, first off let me say, it IS fun. For the philosophically minded, it is often a pleasure to argue. Especially when you know what you’re talking about and the other guy doesn’t. And pro-choicers usually royally suck at being pro-choice.

But I think at the heart of these comments lies a deeper truth. That being that mental masturbation is mostly what the prolifers job is all about. To see this a little clearer, use the STR technique “trot out the toddler”.

Suppose that Scott and Steve were speaking to a crowd of 1000 students who were in support of a hypothetical ‘Nazi’ party with a purported right to burn 1.3 million Jewish toddlers a year.

My god man, would there be any “fun” in that auditorium that night? Sure sounds deadly serious to me.

Tony: "That being that mental masturbation is mostly what the prolifers job is all about. To see this a little clearer, ..."

The phrase "mental masturbation" implies that one's mental energies are being used for a purpose that is not their proper use, and that has no possible profit.

Before we spend our time exploring your analogy (remember, analogy is always suspect!), can you directly claim that prolifer's activities fit that (or some other) definition of "mental masturbation"?

Analogy is wonderful for intuitively exploring truth, but they're horrible for discovering truth.


I think the "foetus fetish" concept is something that sprouts only out of the most self-deluding, hardened consciences, who are unreachable by any means outside divine intervention. No sort of argument, no kind of logic, no apologetics, no demonstration or discussion will shake the position of someone so deluded that they think unborn babies are not human nor to be protected to the point they would consider this to be "fetishism."

Apologetics has its place and is wonderful where God uses it. But there are flat out people who are utterly unreachable by logic and reason, at least in some areas. As Jonathan Swift said:

"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."

The comments to this entry are closed.