A correspondent reminds me that we await Amy's thoughts about Gosnell—

[T]he most likely reason the mainstream media ignored the story as long as possible: The Gosnell story has an inherent pro-life bias, because the Gosnell story leads us to discussing abortion procedures.

When you discuss the act of aborting -- even perfectly legal abortions -- you have to discuss the blood, the scalpels, the scissors. You might use terms like "dilation and extraction" or "dilation and curettage." Think through those terms ("curettage" is defined as "a surgical scraping or cleaning") and recall that what is being extracted or scraped has a beating heart.

The Gosnell story is not about abortion clinics operating under the law but medical misconduct.

I had an abortion once at probably around the two-week mark. I find abortion troubling, but not so much when you're getting rid of a tiny clump of cells that has a potential to be a child.

The heart of the Gosnell story is not his malpractice - although that's horrifying enough. It's the near-complete blackout on any coverage of a story that might cast some doubt on the self-righteous, lockstep support for abortion for any reason, at any point in pregnancy.

Historically, it is reminiscent of Southern support for slavery, the ruthless quashing of dissenting views, and the same wilful blindness to excesses. Note that I am NOT comparing abortion to chattel slavery. But the same psychological processes are at work, and the same effects observable.

I don't think I'll ever like the artist very much, but this is actually pretty good.

And drug abuse isn't about medication but about chemical misbehavior.

TSA mugshots finally getting some mainstream visibility:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/slideshow/photos-rogues-gallery-tsa-agents-17333169

After all the hue and cry, forcing someone to be a mother, when they detest the idea such that they opt for surgery, is not a winning idea.

I wonder what would happen if both "sides" acted as if their cause was lost? Thumpers would quit calling women nasty sluts for having sex, and set up adoption centers. Pro-abortion people would do everything they could to prevent unwanted pregnancy. I suggest this beats argument and violence.

In the end, for those who must make the decision: you reap all the rewards and suffer the consequences. Your body was designed to produce offspring as a result of sex. Don't be irresponsible. It costs everybody.

> I wonder what would happen if both "sides" acted
> as if their cause was lost? Thumpers would quit
> calling women nasty sluts for having sex, and
> set up adoption centers. Pro-abortion people
> would do everything they could to prevent
> unwanted pregnancy. I suggest this beats
> argument and violence.

Best thing you've ever said.

At last, we know who to look for!

Turn down your speakers first.

Re the skin color of Sirot's new best friend: True.

(For example, even though Raddy's correct, above, I still like arguments.)

These media types are real quipsters, real comedians.

Joke

"Pro-abortion people would do everything they could to prevent unwanted pregnancy."

Like offering early sex education, condom giveaways, and other educational and/or preventive programs. I wonder who would stop those ideas from being implemented?

Me. Why should anyone give away condoms?

"Programs," huh?... There's that word again.

There are a thousand reasons that Amy might not have cared to comment on this story, including plain disinterest. But on this point she's correct: Abortion is a human problem, not a government problem.

(Is there any evidence that "early sex education" diminishes abortion?)

Good news from a government that embraces full integration of old-timey religion and social authority:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/04/iran-no-we-dont-have-a-time-machine/

Yeah, no time machine YET.

Rad, you mean like the 4,000 or so crisis pregnancy centers in the US that will provide health screenings, diapers, baby formula, help with social assistance programs, clothing, cribs, etc, including information on adoption organizations if the mom wants? Or does it ONLY have to be an adoption center? What exactly do the prolife people have to do to prove they will actually help?

And that number doesn't include the Gabriel Project, which is at almost every catholic church in the country. They will make sure you get absolutely anything you need if you come in pregnant wanting help. Yes, they'll give you some religious pamplets. They won't tell you you're going to hell or force baptise you.

There's a 2 inch difference in Gosnell and legal late term abortions. What miracle turns someone human in that 2 inches?

Well, hell, mo4, I guess the problem is s-o-l-v-e-d solved!

Meanwhile: there remains the controversy about the "miracle that turns someone human in that 2 inches", in that without medical help, if any infant has a problem there, it can still die. The entire nation is nuts about declaring a fetus human at one point or another before birth, because that puts the burden of proof to show she's not a murderer on a woman who's just miscarried - and NO ONE can guarantee extreme medical measures or even basic fetal viability to women subject to such laws!
That should scare the hell out of you, should you find out you're going to be momof5.

A co-worker puts up quotes of the day. Yesterday it was:

Roses are red.
Violets are blue.
I am schizophrenic
I am too.

My random thought to that was:

Never joke about your mental conditions. Someone might realize you are not kidding.