Letter To The Editor: What Goes Around Will Come Around (Abortion and Hypocrisy)

When I made my symbolic run for the 27th District senate seat, I first had lunch with Jill Vogel to tell her why: that because she was a culture warrior, my conscience wouldn’t allow a coronation. Mrs. Vogel assured me she was not a culture warrior. So, I guess SB484, her abortion bill, wasn’t a calculated political move but was to ensure we had an adequate population to meet our needs now that we’ve scared off immigrants with religious bigotry and racial intolerance, gutted education and most of the other bootstrapping opportunities that gave us hope and class mobility.

Virginia is now in the grip of a conservative mania not unlike the Inquisition, the hallmark of which this time is the tried and true tactic of hypocrisy. Not Indulgences, but enough guns for those who’ll soon be defending the Alamo again, tax breaks for those keeping revenues offshore and outsourcing to places like the Foxconn suicide factory, and abortion guilt. “No government interference” is the battle cry. Except when it suits the conservative mania, like to restrict women’s rights, gay rights, labor rights, or any other rights except those of the religious right.

Senator Vogel patroned a bill that Governor Bob McDonnell (otherwise supremely able to cloak his mania except when it comes to gays or fornicators) will sign into law that requires women to have an ultrasound before they can have an abortion. Senator Vogel says this isn’t “infringement on a woman’s decision, or her autonomy”; or “invasive” – it’s just to confirm gestational age, and a list of agencies offering free ultrasound will (not must) be available. Or what, collect $200?

Sure.

Abortion providers are so stupid they would otherwise be duped by women seeking abortion, or are all venal. And the list will be so current and extensive that there’ll be no delay in aborting and, neither Attorney General Cuccinelli nor AG hopeful Vogel will use this excuse for going after abortion providers with tame anti-abortion experts challenging gestational age conclusions.

So where does a woman get the free ultrasound – a defunded Planned Parenthhood? And where does a woman naïve enough to get pregnant (given all the alternatives and protections available) go for a second chance? And where does a woman faced with the deadend stress of an unwanted child go for gravitas and understanding so to raise that child in a loving and nurturing way?

It seems to me that when conservative religious beliefs prompt the state to force or intimidate a woman to bear an unwanted, unhealthy or criminally conceived child, then the state becomes the guardian ad litem and must provide for that child (food, education, etc) to square the circle.

And if the reasoning is that life was created and isn’t for a mere vessel (aka woman) to take, then if the child was unwanted, the act of creation of life was a felonious assault on that unwilling to become pregnant woman. And if life was created the moment the woman was fertilized, then every male capable of fertilizing a woman must either have the woman’s written consent to get her pregnant or be sterilized so no fertilization can occur without the woman’s written consent.

That should make Virginia the Place for Lovers that its ads claim it to be. And it should make conservatives pray fervently that the pendulum doesn’t soon swing the other way.

Donald Marro

Mr. Marro ran as an independent candidate against incumbent Jill Vogel in the 2012 Virginia 27th District senate seat race.

Comments

  1. Shaun Broy says:

    “The Jill” is radically wrong. What happened to all the talk during her reelection campaign about her main focuses were going to be on creating jobs, improving the economy, law enforcement and our schools??? BLAH. BLAH. BLAH. These stunts are calculated and scripted to gain attention across the state. “The Jill” is all about herself and her self serving interests, as her eyes are set on a higher prize. She made no mention of vaginal ultrasound probing legislation during her campaign either… are senator has talked the talk but surely has failed to walk the walk…”The Jill” is all about Jill. The truth is that it was wrong of her to mislead the voters of the 27th District of Virginia. We deserve better!

    • Shaun Broy says:

      P.S. Mr. Marro and myself tried to tell you a little bit about who the real “Jill” is and what she is all about… Radically Wrong… and focused on “The Jill” and her rise to power. You chose to ignore our words of truth. The truth hurts.

    • So she can only spend her and her staff’s time on three things? Good thing you didn’t win, we need someone that can walk AND chew gum at the same time

  2. Clarke Eagle says:

    Well I see liberals are in a full uproar because limits are being placed on how may unborn human beings women can kill. Yep I can see how dangerous that policy is.

    Please don’t preach about off shoring, outsourcing, H1B Visa policy. The anointed one displayed his ignorance regarding this subject was exposed when he answered the question regarding the unemployed engineer.

    Maybe you would prefer Hillary and her big Support for INFOSYS and Tata Systems. Both suck up H1B Visa slots. They immediately bring folks over from India to replace American Workers. These people do not have higher degrees nor do the possess skills greater than those American workers that they replace. What they do offer is to work more hours for less wages while living 8 people to a two bedroom apartment.

    Lets not even go into illegal immigration that drives down the wages for all the unskilled labor in the US.

    You want to know what there is a growing income gap these 2 issues are the biggest driving forces behind that. In search of more votes the Democrat and Liberal Extremist want open boarders for all. Just as long as these folks vote democrat the more the merrier.

    I guess more machete attacks in Watermelon Park is just the price that law abiding citizens have to pay for this policy failure.

    Stop bloviating and join the rest of us in the real world.

  3. Still infinately preferable to the character you turned out to be. How’s that discrimination thing against SU going? Gotten back in the good graces of the local sheriffs yet?

    Jill is a conservative, so it’s only natural she’s going to do what she can to preserve a life. Woman still have the ability to have abortions in the state, this measure does nothing to impede that, aside from the stipulation of the ultrasound.

    Funny how dems are all about waiting periods on say, buying guns (which kill) but are all about killing immediately via abortion

    Hypocracy much?

    • Shaun Broy says:

      Sarge… Things are actually going quite well in regards to that “discrimination thing against SU.”

      In regards to the two sheriffs… I withdrew the charges and issued a public apology, which brought an end to that situation. I haven’t received a thank you card from either of them though and don’t expect one to end up in my mailbox anytime soon. I actually have received numerous expressions of good will from various Democratic Party leaders in the area in regards to me putting that issue to bed.

      Finally… You ask… “Hypocracy much?”

      HYPOCRISY = “The Jill”

      • I don’t know how you think a conservative, voting for a pro life bill, is hypocritical. This again demonstrates your unbalanced and illogical thought processes that frankly, I’m glad the people didn’t send to represent us in Richmond.

        It’s especially amusing to see someone of a liberal persuasion throw out the word “hypocrite”. This, coming from the side of the political spectrum that is all about giving terrorists “rights”, but gives no consdieration to a fetus, even in some cases, a fetus that a day later would be a baby. Your side talks big about the environment and yet trashes the Mall and various parks during protests. Your side tells us we all have to stop using gas and oil and use “green power”, and yet Ted Kennedy single handedly brought a wind farm to a halt off the coast of Mass where it could be seen from his home

        The list goes on and on.

        You can probably accuse Jill of quite a few things that may stick, but accusing her of being hypocritial lacks any basis. At least in the real world. And again, that is why I’m glad Jill is down there and not you

    • Really! This works both ways you know, how many four celled embryos are killed next to how many people are shot?

  4. goodgracious says:

    I am dismayed that the priority agenda in Richmond are the so called social issues. When there are so many other issues, one being jobs, another being the economy. Zealots should not be allowed to put zygotes at the forefront of our priorities

    • Clarke Eagle says:

      The left wing zealots have put killing unborn babies ahead of everything else for the last 40 years. Where have you been? This has been the litmus test for everything from laws, to politicians, to judges.

  5. I'm correct says:

    Abortion is murder, and should only be done when the safety of the mother is in question.

  6. Donald C. Marro says:

    Once more into the breach (no birthing pun intended) with some of the usual suspects.

    Before getting to these worthies, I sent Mrs. Vogel a copy of this letter before publication. I’m looking forward to hearing her response in defense of the kind of class warfare that gets roundly condemned by her fellows when it comes to the players who created a laissez-faire financial system, gamed it with derivatives and off-balance sheet liabilities, then outsmarted themselves and crashed the world economy. Superheroes all.

    The larger debate here is existential. Not who calls the shots existential but whether we have a flat earth and religious right existential. For all you Clarke County Ph.D’s: enumerate over the period from the beginning of the world on your calendar (you know, about 6,000 years ago, wasn’t it) all the scientific, medical, agricultural, astronomical, etc., advances that any of the world’s religions were responsible for producing. Compare and contrast that with the wars, crusades, Inquisitions, venality and so on that these religions actually produced, including those of the current period. You may exclude Pat Robertson from your efforts since his god revealed to him that Barack Obama is the next President and so he’s somewhat discombobulated at the moment.

    Make no mistake, dear friends, I don’t oppose your right to worship any way you wish (with some exceptions for those among you favoring human or animal sacrifice or assassinations of abortion providers) any more than I oppose your right to be Redskins fans, or short, or freckled. But don’t think you’re the only ones on the planet. Or in the universe. Ain’t that right, ET

    Let’s start at the bottom (again no pun intended). “I’m correct” isn’t. For “I’m correct”, sure. For the world at large, no. For you, “I’m correct”, it’s simple – don’t do it. For those who feel differently, the law of the land is otherwise. But let’s assume you were asked to defend this position. You’d say what? Exactly when is it murder? At impulse? penetration? ejaculation? viability? birth? popping Cialis?

    Moving to Clark Eagle, the worthy who thinks women are killers. Adler meinherr, what about the responsible man who didn’t pull out, or lied about his self-control, or didn’t give a (four letter word for something we all have to do sometime) for anything but his pleasure, une boite l’ordure that he is. And the rape victim. Woman have choices, meinherr, the Old Testament was a really fun time but we’ve actually recognized quite a lot of value in the gender since then. Hadn’t you heard or do you still intend to keep that rotary phone with party line that the Smithsonian has been after you to donate.

    And now, there’s Sarge; but there’s always Sarge, isn’t there. I move to promote Sarge. By the power vested in me by the liberal establishment, Teddy Kennedy, Saul Alinsky, and my personal hero, FDR, I pronounce you Commandatore. Saluto. Commandatore, I don’t think a conservative voting for abortion restrictions, flat earth, earthcentric solar system or 6,000 year old planet is hypocritical. What is hypocritical is denying being a culture warrior, faux claims of a singular focus on more pertinent matters of substance, and the spin used to describe the bill. You run on this, you’re entitled. You hide it, you’re a hypocrite. Capisce, dottore?

    And last, to the vitriol dispensed to Shaun Broy. Mr. Broy stood up to be counted when the Democrats displayed their utter lack of fitness to be anything but laughingstocks and punching bags. The party of giants fielded no one until Mr. Broy offered to be their standard bearer. But the other party of giants fielded culture warriors and apologists for the grim conditions their Superheroes made for the rest of us. Small wonder neither party decides elections but Independents do. Reckon technology or even manufacturing companies will fall all over themselves to be in the land of the culture warriors? Or will their rank and file?

    My conservative friends, I advised praying fervently but you may also want to cross your fingers – just in case.

  7. Pro-Choice says:

    Before aborting, an ultrasound tech verifies the status of the fetus. You are given the option to not look, actually they prefer you not to. It’s part of the protocol. The entire process is based on the stability of the woman to make a choice, you speak with nurses, therapists, doctors. It should stay that way regardless of the situation. When did someone obtain the right to make choices pertaining to another’s body? People need to focus on their own lives. This article nit-picks at an issue far greater than an ultrasound. It boggles my mind that someone running for senate would take the time to make this point part of their campaign.

    • Uh, If you wanted to cut off your arms in your front yard, the police would stop you in a ny minute. Ergo, you dont have the right to do anything with your body..

  8. If an ultra-sound sways the decision of the mother, then she probably wasn’t set on her decision to begin with and this ultrasound may save her a lot of pain and anquish later. I’ve met people who regretted having an abortion…never met one that regretting having the baby. I truly don’t know how I stand on abortion, I see both sides, but I personally don’t see the harm in this.

  9. Donald C. Marro says:

    Almost like a chat room, Pro Choice, except I seemed to have converted everybody to my point of view but you. Or are they just catching their breath. Or contacting the Lynchburg/Regent University mother ship for guidance.

    Anyway, ProChoice, I think you may be confused, or a poor typist. ProChoice means to me that ultrasound is for cleaning your dentures not “verifying the status of the fetus”. Did you mean ProLife but have a migraine?

    And what status do you need to verify? Location? Whether it has galoshes? Even your heroine didn’t say the fetus status (do I detect a bumper sticker here?) needed checking, just the “gestational conclusion”, you know, in case the woman needing an abortion inadvertently went to a witch doctor not an abortion provider, one who has probably reached more correct “gestational conclusions” than you’ve eaten Big Macs.

    And here’s where you post gets even more enjoyable – you say people should focus on their own lives. Yes, they should. And so it was written. But then, oddly, you say the article “nit-picks at an issue far greater than ultrasound”. Yes, it does. The right to choose. The right to decide whose choice it is to bring a particular impregnation to term, the woman’s or the religious right’s.

    And the right to be inform fully of the motives for running for office. And the right to be free of hypocrisy.

    Forgive me, I may have misunderstood the boggle mechanism as it applies to your mind, but do you mean to say a candidate for public office should be silent on, or lie, respecting their agenda in order to get in under the radar, and then throw open the kimono afterward? Even our esteemed and superbly non-activist Supreme Court justices haven’t yet dared to enshrine lying to the electorate, but give them time. It is, after all, speech.

    • “And the right to be free of hypocrisy.”

      That’s good. Coming from someone who just a week or so ago was advocating animal rights in a tome about Sunday hunting. Telling that you advocate “rights” for animals, which is a ludicrious position in it’s own right, and yet appear to have no concern for the rights of the unborn

      • Naked Truth says:

        If men were affected the same from a sexual assault the same as a woman, then they would think differently. I understand the whole “life” thing, but you need to understand the forever reminder of a rape to a woman. How can people like you force her to always live through that? I can’t believe you would be against the “day after pill” in a case like this. I’m not for all out abortion, but in some cases it should be up to the woman.
        If you are a victim of a crime, vandalism, or assault, I bet you would want everything to be as it was before. Not have to live either damaged, broken, or with the token of the assault. Typical male right winged response. Live and walk in the shoes of these women before you speak for everybody else.

        • “Typical male right winged response.”

          Nice screed, but you don’t know a thing about my stance on the issue. My dog in the fight so far is folks coming in and ranting about a politician being “hypocritical” on the issue and about another being here talking about “hypocracy” while advocating animal rights but not the rights of hte unborn.

          For the record, I don’t like abortion. If a baby can be brought to term without harm to itself or the mother, I think it should.

          That said, I do find it hypocritical that people that want government out of people’s lives should turn around and mandate something like this. Personally, I think it should be left up to the woman, but only to a certain point. Say, not after the first trimester. And mind you, that’s just a point in space that’s comfortable in my own mind. It shouldn’t be used as birth control either. Nor should taxpayers have to fund it.

          Now, if a woman is raped, or if her brother or her daddy jumps on her or something along those lines, then it should be allowed, but again, I’d only comfortable up to around the first trimester.

          So, now that you’ve had a big ol’ cup of “wrong” for the day…………………

          Happy Monday

          • Naked Truth says:

            OK, in your great mind what is the difference between her being raped and “her brother or her dady jumps her”? This is my point, people like you should not speak for the rest of us if you can’t tell the difference. You have spouted off too many times for us to know your stance on these issues.
            Oh and by the way, abortions happen in all classes of people. Some people just have more hush money.

          • One is an act of force. The other happens up the road in West Virginia;)

          • Mr Mister says:

            So nice to find humor in a serious topic.

  10. Donald C. Marro says:

    Welcome aboard, Kim.

    I respect the reasoning you wish to apply to support the use of an ultrasound to deter a woman from having an abortion but wonder how solid you really believe your reasoning is, or for that matter whether you think you operate on a sound statistical footing or mere propaganda or religious conviction. Let’s look more closely.

    You see both sides? What purpose could an ultrasound purportedly required to check gestational age have on a woman’s decision unless it was unambiguously to, as you say, intimidate and oppress. If there is any honesty in you, can you truly say that this isn’t an emotional decision, but isn’t it unequivocally the woman’s decision, not the ultrasound tech, the religious right’s or whatever authority figure those who would make this decision for the distraught woman involved wishes to interpose. Oh, but you say the woman is distraught and not thinking clearly. No, the woman has made a decision against these pressures and should be allowed to decide what her body, life and energy will be used for. She can have a child later if she wants. If she wants.

    I will leave you to contemplate the candor and honesty of your statements that you’ve never met any one who regretted having a baby, but know a convincing, even compelling number who regret having aborted. I doubt that. But I will say beyond registering my skepticism that this state of affairs you describe with great anecdotal fervor would profoundly militate against abortion per se, and hasn’t. Care to guess why?

    • Why do you feel the need to interpret what I say to mean anything different than what it is? Where did I say anything about intimidating? Where did I say a woman was distraught and not thinking clearly? And, convincing and compelling number who have regretted abortion, where did I say that?

      Do you actually read what people write?

      And no, I don’t care to guess why you think anything you do.

  11. Tammy Lanham says:

    Puns and poor choice of words aside, I at first found Mr. Marro’s views on various subjects curious and slightly insightful… but after scanning his “responses” above I am quite sure he has not “converted” many to his point of view. And the thought of Mr. Marro actually trying to understand the views of others (without interpreting them in such a self-serving fashion) would indeed boggle the mind.

    Won’t be reading any more from Mr. Marro. I have more productive things to do with my time.

    “you say people should focus on their own lives. Yes, they should.”

    • Mr. Marrow is obviously less interested in converting or convincing anyone of his point of view than impressing them with his poetic verse. Nor is he concerned with understanding the views of others.

      To have the time and resources and not the tact or ability to know when you are down to an audience of one is something to be pitied.

      What is more, if one were willing to shlog through his verbose rants they may find that he has some worthy thoughts to share.

      “arrogant intelligence” is wasted potential. Sad, but not rare.

  12. clarke conservative says:

    James Wilson, a framer of the U.S. Constitution and one of the six original Justices of the Supreme Court appointed by George Washington, explained as follows:

    “With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law. In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb. By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and, in some cases, from every degree of danger.’

    With today’s technologial advances (ie ultrasounds) movement can be detected at very early stages of development. I should know. A few years ago I had the joy of seeing an ultrasound of my daughter at 8-weeks from conception. I could clearly see a head, eyes, backbone, and a beating heart. Yes … a heart beating at 165 bps.

    According to the New York TImes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/13/us/rape-and-incest-just-1-of-all-abortions.html) , only 1% of abortions are due to rape, incest, etc. 6% are due to potential defects in the fetus, harm to the mother, etc. The rest, 93% or almost 1.5 million abortions, are performed soley as a ‘convenience’ to the mother.

    Many people may not realize that prior to Roe vs Wade (1973) abortion was legal in Virginia, but it was restricted to possible dangers to woman’s health, rape or incest, or likely damaged fetus. This is the main argument of those who are pro-choice (aka pro-abortion) use to defend its cause.

    SB484 does not restrict abortion in any way. It gives a confused and frightened prospective mother an opportunity to see the horrible thing they are about to undergo. 11 states already have laws like SB484, and their abortion rates have dropped by more than 60+%. (http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/10129929-452/pre-abortion-ultrasound-law-saves-lives.html)

    It seems when a mother is given a chance to witness the miracle of life, the majority will choose life.

    • Naked Truth says:

      Not to change the subject, but since you and most of the consevative quote the Constitution and Madison the framer. How do feel about the portion about freedom of religion? After all Muslim is a religion. Why are you fighting for the rights all of the Muslims?

      • I thought the “religion of peace” was referred to as “islam”? And what rights do they not have in this country that someone should fight for?

        • Naked Truth says:

          Just fight for their freedom to practice their religion. Instead of bashing, blaming, and accusing Obama for being one. It’s in the Constitution!

  13. Everyone wants government in their lives. As in stopping someone from murdering them.

  14. DonalC. Marro says:

    How nice to see that most of you exercise varying degrees of intelligent reasoning on issues important to your personal lives. While some of you believe that debating is the delivery of an insult, or the jejeune threat to hold your breath, others actually try. My compliments.

    Here we go.

    Sarge, your promotion to Commendatore seems to have brought an epiphany. Or maybe there is some empathy lurking beneath a persona that uses dogfighting metaphors. Dottore, please listen closely, Animal WELFARE not animal rights. Can you get someone to read that out loud for you? And you are compassion personified to allow abortions up through the first trimester. But still not your decision, Dottore.

    Kim, yes I do. Do you? Perhaps the kind soul who reads for Sage(aka Commendatore) will also read for you.

    Tammy, bye-bye. Parting is such sweet sorrow.

    Jennifer, it’s Marro, senza “w”. Even in these parts. I think I may have outdone myself, rising to the level of “poetic verse”, “verbose rants”, “arrogant intelligence” while offering “worthy thoughts to share”. Your creative writing teacher would be proud. But before showing this effort to them, check the difference between shlog and schlep. Neither one is apt, but shlog is closer to santorum than you might be comfortable with.

    And now the knight in conservative armor, my friend CC. Quoting James Wilson on life I see. From where, pray? One of the nine opinions during his years on the Supreme Court, or his lectures at UPa? If the former, dicta and the musing of an activist Justice (send a shiver down you spine, CC? you do know what a spine is, yes?) since no abortion cases came before the Court on which he served. If the latter, what’s the full cite? And did you also read that James Wilson in his first lecture said “When I deliver my sentiments from this chair, they shall be my honest sentiments: when I deliver them from the bench, they shall be nothing more. In both places I shall make ― because I mean to support ― the claim to integrity: in neither shall I make ― because, in neither, can I support ― the claim to infallibility.” (First lecture, 1804 Philadelphia ed.)

    Here’s another from Wilson: “When divorces can be summoned to the aid of levity, of vanity, or of avarice, a state of marriage frequently becomes a state of war or stratagem.’ Prescient, eh? Had Newt in mind, you think? Sorry, a distraction. Much like the charming story of your daughter’s movements. Ever candle an egg? Watch the yolk move as ontogeny recapitulates phyllogeny. Life? Nah. Passage of time; gravity, biology; physics. Or is gravity proof of a divine presence? Yahweh or No Way? No Way.

    And CC, just the facts, SVP, unless your erudite introduction is mere windowdressing for gutlevel prejudice. The NYTimes piece did not say “convenience”, it said “other reasons”, but the study was not “controlled” (know what that means, CC?) for candor, so we don’t know how many would have said rape or incest had there been the proper scientific environment, but the rape or incest victim in Virginia doesn’t get off the hook in any case, does she, Papa CC. Remember the question put to Dukakis? How about it, Papa CC.

    And CC, spare me and thinking people who don’t pray in your church, mosque or synagogue the “horrible thing they are about to undergo” crap. To you, horrible. To them, a relief, second chance, or even salvation. Tolerance, CC. It’s good for the soul. Even if you think otherwise. Do unto others.

    And thank you, one and all. Or maybe, most.

    • clarke conservative says:

      A picture is worth a thousand words. A video is even better:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPu7WVBU5GE

    • clarke conservative says:

      I quote James Wilson from “Of the Natural Rights of Individuals” (1790-1792) while he was a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Suggest you read it. Wilson died pennyless in 1798. It was his son who published much of his work in 1804, to pay off debts. Wilson was a Supreme Court Justice for only 8 short years, but from his contributions to the the Articles of Confederation to the compiling of the Constitution he was clearly one of the great founding fathers.

      Comparing a fetus to an egg? Hardly. I suggest you view the development of a fetus at: (http://www.medicinenet.com/fetal_development_pictures_slideshow/article.htm) Quite often pictures can articulate far more than words can express.

      I find it amazing there are people out there that will swallow the junk science of Global Warming, and all the corrupt manipulations of data and calculations that accompanies it, but cannot look at an ultrasound of a fetus with eyes, hands, feet and a beating heart and not recognize it as a human being.

    • goodgracious says:

      Ya know, you have a pretty good platform, and I agree with your basic premise, but you really come off as someone who thinks he’s too good for anybody. And that is too bad.

      Unfortunately you make ultra conservatives look good. Hard to do but you did it.

    • Donal,

      I have no teacher (or teachers since you suggested the plural “them”) If you somehow took something I wrote as a compliment…..oops – not intended, but you may want to find them where ever you can.

    • “But still not your decision, Dottore.”

      Nor yours, filosofo. As I’m sure you are aware, we send people to government to represent our views and ideals. As it stands, more officials were elected this time that want to curb abortion, or at least make a woman think about what they are about to do. It’s the way things work in this country, unless of course you’re Barack Obama, then you can either nationalize the abortion industry, or just say “We won” or “Sit in the back”.

      I don’t see the “extreme right wing zealots” doing that in Richmond right now, do you? Perhaps, after this years Republican swell and however long it takes the Dems to be relavent again, there will be others that will allow unlimited access, but it’ll probably take another generation or so.

  15. Shaun Broy says:

    This is like old times… When we get on here debating this issues it gets as heated and entertaining as a reality show! Unfortunately… This isn’t an entertaining issue…

  16. Donald C. Marro says:

    CC strikes back with a chestnut, that a picture is worth a thousand words. To what end? To prove movement is life? To prove that requiring an ultrasound is not unwarranted intimidation? To prove you or the religious right have the chops or should be empowered to make decisions for women?

    The ground is shaky underfoot, CC.

    And CC, the comparison I made and you missed was movement over time in an egg is incipient ontogeny, and no less conclusive of life than movement in a womb. Just as movement in a womb isn’t.

    But you did get it right that James Wilson was a giant. Why you added that he died penniless, or that his son published his wisdom to pay his debts (an honorable endeavor, it seems to me) is a tad defensive, my son, but so what. You missed that he was also an early lobbyist, for the French court, but for all that was a giant. And unlike you or your co-religionists, he thought himself fallible. You also missed that.

    And Wilson never cited English common law (there being no American common law to speak of, and Sharia law, then as now, was off-limits) to confer upon a fetus the dignity of “life” for there was no such authority for him to cite.

    There are many works on Wilson and I’d like to see the quote you claim for him in context. Which lecture was the quote from? Not that it’ll rise to more than a curiosity since 18th century science or law neither definitively nor even superficiallly understood life, but so when you parade your argument before this august readership as intellectually rigorous, you’ll have me to confirm it is. Or any one else who doesn’t take bluster as gospel.

    Wilson doesn’t prove much, CC. Sorry. You don’t have a video of him, do you – perhaps played by Jose Ferrer?

    • clarke conservative says:

      James Wilson’s quote can be found at: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=831#26return

      Your reference to James Wilson not citing Common Law I present one of many examples:

      “Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law… The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all.”

      —Quoting James Wilson, The Works of James Wilson, Robert Green McCloskey, editor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967), Vol. II, pg. 605.

      I do not come to the conclusion life begins at conception from religious doctrine, but from observation … basic science. The ultrasound gives us the ability to observe things we could hardly dream of, even just a few short years ago. Access to technology is one of many reasons 51% of Americans now say they are Pro-Life. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/more-americans-pro-life-than-pro-choice-first-time.aspx) . This number surely will grow as people see a fetus more as a human being than an inconvenience.

      I am very proud of my State Senator, Jill Vogel, for introducing SB484.

  17. Mimi Stein says:

    Question: Who is supposed to pay for the ultrasound (some $600)?
    – The State which is mandating the procedure?
    – The insurance company?
    – The doctor or clinic?
    – The patient?

    Unless it is someone other than the patient, then Senator Vogel’s bill creates a basic economic unfairness. Rich enough, you can have an abortion; don’t have the $600, and your legal choice is denied to you. No matter whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, this double standard is the wrong way to go about promoting the pro-life agenda.

    • Question: Who is supposed to pay for the ultrasound (some $600)?
      – The State which is mandating the procedure?
      – The insurance company?
      – The doctor or clinic?
      – The patient?

      Were you asking this question during the Obamacare debate?

  18. Shaun,

    You hit the nail on the head as usual. That woman only cares about herself!

    Please forget all the haters on here, because there are a core group of us that have remained true!

    Keep pushing forward.

    JW

  19. Donald C. Marro says:

    It seems that another perfectly good debate has occurred, lots of comments, a good many votes from the silent majority, some mental exercise for some, and some crude attempts at verbal fistshaking by others.

    For those of you fond of the one-liner insults to make what you think is a persuasive point and yourselves feel good, learn from the others, or get a creative writing teacher(s) (Jennifer can’t help in that respect, sorry). For those of you who actually piece entire sentences together using logic adopted from the religious right or the talk show “hosts” that dupe you into thinking they’re oracles when all they want are sponsors and to sell you gold (or hack your emails), thank you for having a pulse. You may be mistaken, but you at least care.

    And for those of you who agree with me, thank you as well but try writing more yourselves. Or run for office. You don’t, and you get others who think less but work harder.

    And especially for those like goodgracious who thinks personality trumps content. Goodgracious, you have a point but the wrong subject for your expression of dismay. You are all adults, or should be, and therefore must learn to recognize that merit isn’t congeniality. Frankly, it doesn’t surprise me that you’d like to hear less contempt for or denigration of stupid ideas, but how then do you discourage stupid ideas? OK, stupid is over the top. Ideas that the speaker should know, if they had any respect for their audience, should be withheld. They don’t; neither did Christopher Hitchens (as great, CC, as James Wilson). Neither do I.

    You don’t want to think, or reason, or have compassion, or want to mistake bloodsport for living, or hating for being fulfilled, go ahead and waste the gifts of intellect that evolution brought you over the milennia. You do know that the particular evolutionary vector of which you present evidence will stop with you, but if that doesn’t make you stare up at the heavens and shiver, just have another Oreo.

    I think I’ll write about guns next. So many shibboleths, so little time.

  20. Mr Marro writes: “For all you Clarke County Ph.D’s….”

    Then: “…I seemed to have converted everybody to my point of view but you. Or are they just catching their breath. Or contacting the Lynchburg/Regent University mother ship for guidance.”

    Followed by: “While some of you believe that debating is the delivery of an insult….”

    He may or may not make valid points. But with writing like that, I quickly lose interest in whatever point he is trying to make.

    • just the facts..PLEASE says:

      Keenque…….I agree, it tends to be demeaning and condescending……I guess that is how one writes when your EGO is even larger than your vocabulary.

  21. clarke conservative says:

    Look forward to a spirited discussion on the 2nd amendment. I trust Mr. Marro will become less polemic and more empathic to those who are equally entitled to exercise their 1st amendment rights.

    Nah … That won’t ever happen.

  22. Donald C. Marro says:

    I guess it ain’t over yet..Sarge still had something to say (in Italian yet) and CC zinged me as a polemicist and violator of Amendments 1 and 2. And Keenque offers some keenquements. My cup runneth over.

    So.

    Allora, Dottore/Sergente, tu sei Italiano, bravo! Un caro saluto. Ma mi, sono maestro, senza macchia, si, ma non filosofo. L’anima de filosofo, si, ma uno maestro gli ciechi, come un missionario. Capisce? D’accordo?
    Dottore, I never said it was my decision but the woman’s What makes you or anyone think that a woman can’t decide – because a woman is a “vessel”, or because some religious zealots say so? Elections don’t bestow a right of deprivation, my friend, and your Presidential name-calling, as satisfying as it must be, doesn’t either.

    Now, CC. The Wilson lecture from which you abstracted the quote not surprisingly expounded on Locke’s natural liberty, a particular thorny problem for Wilson and his fellows as believers in “natural liberty” because that theory precluded slavery, yet Jimmy and the Fathers were quite happy to violate principles of natural liberty when those hypocrites chose accomodation to suit their business model. Now calm yourself, CC, they were great men and pragmatic, fighting to get rid of an even worse model, monarchy, but with some terrible ideas about slavery. And women. And Indians. But we live and learn. If we live and learn. Just because you think yourself a “conservative” doesn’t mean you can’t learn. Or does it?

    Note to Sarge: troppo filosofo? m’scusi.

    Now Keenque. How quickly is quickly? Frankly, I wish the prevailing style of discourse amongst your fellow readers were that typified and exemplified by Shields and Brooks, but it isn’t. I’m guilty of sarcasm because I believe that is the currency in widespread use here. Not an excuse, for I support my positions with content but if that doesn’t please you enough to dig in, don’t. And do feel as free as you like to curse the darkness more.

    Bye for now.

    • clarke conservative says:

      Most of the founding fathers were against slavery, but they knew the southern states wouldn’t join in forming ‘a more perfect union’ if slavery was banned. Unfortunately it took a civil war, lead by a great Republican, to correct these transgressions.

      Were the founding fathers perfect? No, only one person to grace this earth can carry that mantra.

      What the founding fathers set in place was the foundation whereby human rights have been granted to all people … except in today’s case, human rights for the unborn. And that will happen in a matter of time, only a matter of time.

  23. “I never said it was my decision but the woman’s What makes you or anyone think that a woman can’t decide – because a woman is a “vessel”, or because some religious zealots say so?”

    Again, we are a nation of laws. Well, unless you’re Barack Obama or Eric Holder, tehn you just ignore them. Currently, the law says abortion is illegal in certain cases. The law says murder is illegal, rape is illegal. We have a myriad of things that are illegal in this country. Suicide is illegal. Assisting someone to commit suicide is illegal. Using your logic, are we, as a state, not taking away that persons right of choice?

    And again I make the point that the side of the political spectrum (that’s liberals) that is all about imposing waiting periods on other people and giving “rights” to terrorists, give no consideration at all to those that are not born.

  24. Fly Swatter says:

    “Virginia is now in the grip of a conservative mania….” – Whats the problem?

  25. Donald C. Marro says:

    Dottore, buon giorno. come’stai.

    Dottore, the sound you hear is logic knocking to ask, please, for admission. We are supposed to be, and we ought to be, a nation of laws but are we really, or is that ideal used against us and hopelessly perverted by the Presidents and senior leaders who feel contempt for ordinary people and lie and steal (how far back shall we go – 20th Century OK?…Harding, Nixon, Agnew, Cunningham, Gingrich)..even our judges like to pretend to a sanctimonious freedom from bias but’ll put kids in jail for contractors who bribe them to build more jails and who behave toward women like bikers. Even my goombah, Nino Scalia can’t put aside his past enough to give up using an Italian salute to show his utter lack of restraint. No, we are a not a nation of laws but a nation of different races and ethnicities trying to make a future and prevail using statutory means not violence over whatever oppression is being used to make any one second class or force conformity with religious dictates of others. Abortion is legal but your side hates that and wants to chip away at availability and accessibility. Your side didn’t like abolition much either, and did its best, even to this very day at voting booths, to retard racial equality.

    Sarge, I believe you are sincere, and commend you for your efforts. But listen to the wind, the rhythms of the spheres, the silences of the universe, etc., and you’ll see that gestation periods are biological imperatives not open to self-serving intrepretation by the religious right.

    CC, you, too. Commendable. Thoughtful. Reasoned. Wrong. But not rabid. Most of the founding fathers were not against slavery but felt it would pass and could thus be overlooked in the interests of getting their natural liberty from a peculiarly arrogant and arguably unbalanced George III. Pragmatists. Abraham Lincoln was also a pragmatist, and unquestionably great. And most everybody thought so except those on your side that think much like anti-abortion people, and so while murder was illegal (even then), and the Presidency was an exalted office (even then), and people regardless of color shouldn’t be slaves (except in some places, like Virginny), it’d be OK to kill him. Sic semper tyrannis, do you think? Scifoso, I think

    Fly Swatter, love your name. Serious, yet not pompous.

    • clarke conservative says:

      Thomas Jefferson’s initial draft of the Declaration of Independence condemned the injustice of the slave trade. It was withdrawn at the objection of delegates from the southern colonies, primarily because slaves were the economic engine of their agrarian culture. Many of the signers either never had slaves (mostly Northerners like John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, etc) or freed all their slaves in their lifetime (like George Washington & Benjamin Franklin). Later in life Benjamin Franklin, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton became very active in anti-slavery societies.

      So it is you who is wrong Mr. Marro … just as you are so wrong on when ‘life’ begins.

      It must be a very difficult time for liberals. For over 40 years one of their core convictions has been to fight for the ‘right to choose’, only now to realize it has been at the destruction of 50 million souls.

  26. I do not like the thought of an abortion. It is scary,sad and the woman (most)carry the guilt for life. Abortion does not come with a “free pass”. Adoption is a wonderful option but must be handled with great care. That means if the woman chooses that route she must be supported,taught the proper pre natal care and given a place of safety. Constant encouragement and no guilt because she is giving the gift of life to a family that really wants that child. But I ask myself this question. If the ultrasound shows a defect in the child how many will be willing to come forward and open their homes to this child? Because bottom line we all want a child that is healthy. I watch Wed Child on tv and I see children that are in need of a home that can give constant help because most of these children carry a handicap. I am not here to argue the pro choice what so ever I am here to say if we want abortion to not be a choice then we need to have the proper steps in place so that these women can be helped. I see ads in the paper all the time for people asking to adopt,putting out their feelings and love for all to see. Perhaps abortion clinics could touch base with these people and see if they cannot connect them with those who chose abortion out of desperation. This is not a perfect answer and I understand the need for confidentiality between the parties involved. Instead of finding ways to dig at each other comments let’s try for a solution.

  27. “Now Keenque. How quickly is quickly? Frankly, I wish the prevailing style of discourse amongst your fellow readers were that typified and exemplified by Shields and Brooks, but it isn’t. I’m guilty of sarcasm because I believe that is the currency in widespread use here. Not an excuse, for I support my positions with content but if that doesn’t please you enough to dig in, don’t. And do feel as free as you like to curse the darkness more.”

    Pretty quickly. Maybe you should try raising the bar instead of lower it by insulting the readers. Online posting 101.

    Curse the darkness? That is what you call stating an observation? Okay. Thank you for your permission. As if I needed it. I post here at the discretion of this website.

    Support your positions with content? I think not. For example, you stated in your first paragraph: “gutted education”. That is hardly true. Where did you back that up?

  28. Talk about a good message getting lost in the delivery. I can’t help but wonder if Mr. Marro wakes up and has the thought that he shall toy with the little people of Clarke County that day. It humors him so.
    Mr. Marro, you are giving the conservatives here a target. I can’t defend your position on this issue because everyone, including me, is so aggravated by your arrogance.
    Let’s declare a moratorium on responding to Mr. Marro from here on out. Three….Two…..One…..silence.

    • Disclaimer – I am a liberal. As left wing as they get. Huggin a tree as I write this. Picketed in front of Mr. Wolf’s office last year. Voted for Mr. Broy. Disturbed by what is happening in Richmond.
      I am sad that we can’t have civil discussions about politics without attacking and demeaning those whose views are different than ours. I am not saying that we should not read what Mr. Marro wrote, nor am I saying that we shouldn’t write our own views in response. What makes me cringe is the personal, condescending attacks back and forth. I shouldn’t have, but I engaged in the sidebars that had nothing to do with the issue. Let’s get back on track.

      • Actually, considering the topic is abortion, and the feelings the subject envokes, I think it’s been pretty calm. Now excuse me while I go burn a tire to offset the carbon credits you bought yesterday;)

      • Shaun Broy says:

        Deb… Thank you so very much for your vote. You joined 8,000 others in casting a vote in my name and sailing against the wind. I am honored.

      • As I have a long memory, things went south when the liberals went off the deep end in 1980, when Reagan was elected. Prior to that, things were relatively peaceful.

  29. Donald C. Marro says:

    A remark like the one from Deb P. demands a response, not because the remark’s content is especially pregnant (could that be a pun?) but because it is puling and empty, and explains to me why it is that so many of the viewpoints that have been and will be expressed here are more rant than reason.

    My obligation as a rhetorician is to articulate clearly, not to beg for your goodwill. But I will say, no doubt to great joy and some considerable surprise, that I have no more interest in demeaning “the little people of Clarke County” than I do of pulling wings off flies, so if you think that is either my aim or my source of jollies, you might want to lower your sugar intake. Moreover, you are not my allies so consider carefully whether I am likely to much care whether you think I give the “conservatives” a target. It is my experience that conservatives like soft targets, and respectfully, that’s what those of you who trade rant and insults are.

    Reason macht frei, but that takes effort, doesn’t it.

    My single purpose, expressed perhaps in terms loftier than you might find in common use on YouTube or American Idol, is to stimulate or even teach, to challenge the nonsense that passes as the foundation for the anti-abortion argument, or for unlimited access to firearms (OK, guns), or gay bashing, or whatever it is you think distinguishes you as an American (or little person of Clarke County) but instead unequivocally qualifies you as bigot.

    My delivery doesn’t appeal? Read every other word, or cover your eyes, or play Faure in the background.

    And CC, being wrong on the extent of slaveholding among the FF’s doesn’t make me wrong on anything else, or you right. Nice try. Bet you got some high fives on that one. Give ’em back. And by the way, I didn’t say owned slaves, I said not against slavery – move your finger more slowly, it aids comprehension.

    And Keenque. Have you seen what passes as state support of education lately. Not aware that teachers were paid out of stimulus money because your fiscal SuperHeroes could care less about public education in public schools. Try again, or curse the darkness some more. For that , you need a vocabulary of curses, incantation and such but, you too are right, not my permission. Nor did I expect so, or care.

    And for those of you troubled by my vocabulary. I can grunt if that’s your preference.

    Uh, Uh. Not Italian, Dottore, chimpspeak. Capisce, Jane?

  30. Shaun Broy says:

    Your silences will not protect you…. What are the words you do not yet have? What are the tyrannies you swallow day by day and attempt to make your own, until you will sicken and die of them, still in silence?

    I use to ask myself each time: “What’s the worst that could happen to me if I tell this truth?”

    Now I ask: “What’s the worst that will happen?” Once you start to speak out with conviction regarding controversial issues, people will yell at you. They will interrupt you, put you down and suggest it’s personal. And the world won’t end….

    Then at last you’ll know with surpassing certainty that only one thing is more frightening than speaking the truth. And that is not speaking at all…

    Ever since I decided too run for office, there are those who have been trying to silence my voice. I’ve been told to “sit down and shut up” a time or two. Well… I won’t sit down and I won’t shut up until the full and unvarnished truth is placed before the people.

    If the conservatives here are dumb enough to take the bait… time and time again… then let them!

    Just like here in VA… The conservatives (Radical Right) are dumb enough to over reach and engage in such a culture war… When during their campaigns they preached jobs, schools, transportation… etc…

    It’s a classic example of the old “bait and switch” game that will ultimately lead to their demise by firing up the left AND the middle… Until they get the boot…

    The reason we ended up in this ditch is because too many Democrats remained silent the past couple years, especially in 2011…

    Silence is not a show of strength folks… but all too clear a sign of weakness!

    • clarke conservative says:

      In principle I agree with Mr. Broy about no longer remaining silent, but obviously from the other side of the political spectrum.

      For over 50 years we have been spoon-fed a liberal agenda from the media. Whether it was Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather or Barbara Walters, liberals have dominated the public dissemination of ideas. Apart from magazines from the likes of William F Buckley’s National Review, The Wall Street Journal or our local Editor at the Winchester Star, the left had an absolute monopoly, especially on television.

      No longer. Conservatives will not remain silent, and this drives liberal’s nuts. We have Fox News (#1 in News), Rush Limbaugh (#1 on radio) and Sean Hannity (#2 on radio) to articulate our frustrations with the liberal socialist agenda. But the biggest impact will be that wonderful invention of Al Gore, the internet. Now someone as insignificant as I, can have my turn proving liberals wrong.

      Freedom of Speech is a wonderful thing.

  31. jeezy pete. every thing that marro wrote is dead-on.
    conservatives want less government intrusion and spending and yet, here’s this stupid bill they’re pushing requiring more government intrusion and more government spending.
    and somehow this obviously trampling of conservative ‘values’ is all forgivable (maybe i’m not talking about voters, maybe there is some ultrasound tech collective interest board or business that’s been in vogel’s ear. maybe they want to give out more than a fruit basket to their ceos this xmas, i dunno, maybe this has nothing to do with life and everything to do with greed)
    the conservative stance on championing life is blatant. if the life in question is a fetus, they’re all over it. it’s their business, their problem, they are bound and determined to save this life, this life with no rights or voice, it’s what god wants them to do!
    but let that little sucker make it out into the world. i read sarge moan and groan just about every day about any and all social programs and welfare and let’s not forget our “food stamp president.”
    see, once the child is here and a SSN verified tax credit, then the argument shifts and it’s all about picking one’s self up by the boot straps and accountability and autonomy and why can’t everyone just take care of themselves and leave me and mine the hell alone?
    this is the entire problem – dualism is an extremely outdated worldview. we have two seeming sides in this country, conservative and liberal, and yet neither of these sides are arguing the correct points because they get all wrapped up in the grey matter the government can’t actually control, no matter how many bills they draft and push on the books. the government can’t regulate personal morality and the government shouldn’t be attempting to dictate medical procedure or the relationship between doctor and patient.
    marro has made some viable points with this piece, but all any of you can do is judge his character, err, his online character. prolife or prochoice, at the end of the day, we’re all flapping our gums talking about a whole lot of nothing. just like in the comments of this post.

  32. Mr Marro writes: “And Keenque. Have you seen what passes as state support of education lately. Not aware that teachers were paid out of stimulus money because your fiscal SuperHeroes could care less about public education in public schools. Try again, or curse the darkness some more.”

    I feel that spending and budgeting should be done in a responsible manner and not raise or lower at the whim of the federal government (i.e., short term stimulus spending). This applies other services such as fire and police. The stimulus money, as you are well aware, was thrust upon us by President Obama and his friends in Congress. If I recall correctly – and I could be wrong about this point – states were required to take it or risk losing other funding. Hardly fiscal responsibility. But hey, the president gave us something for nothing right?

    Are you aware that education spending per pupil (in the USA, per state) – adjusted for today’s dollar – has risen sharply over the years? I am talking about decades. Yet test results have not kept pace. Not even close. The data is out there for all to see.

    Moreover, some states that spend less per pupil than other states produce higher scores. Something to think about.

    So clearly it’s not just a matter of throwing money at the problem.

    There is more to it than that. There are private schools that spend far less per pupil yet produce higher results. Why do you think that is? I would suggest less bureaucracy is one reason. The ability to let go of under-producing teachers is another. NEA anyone? Dept. of Education? Every time a layer is added it costs money.

    Throwing out words like “gutted” is just a scare tactic.

    Yes, spending can change from year to year. Education is hardly “gutted” unless you have a very radical definition for that word.

    At the end of the day I think it’s fair to say that reasonable people from both sides of the aisle want their kids to have a quality education. But simple throwing more money at the problem is not the answer.

    I hope that makes sense to you but I suppose you will just consider it more “cursing the darkness.” Whatever that means.

    A non-Phd Clarke County resident.

    • Virginiacop says:

      Well said. Same goes for police. If the times dictate a smaller budget I’ll still come to work and do the same job as before. We don’t need the borrowed money.

  33. Donald C. Marro says:

    It appears time to again remind all you Rush wannabees and Hannity acolytes that the topic was abortion and hypocrisy, viz, how abortion is the law of the land but all you conservatives and zealots decided, because you don’t like it, it just ain’t right. So Mrs. Vogel, the religious right’s designated hitter here, dusted off a perennial, and made government a bigger part of women’s life. Then Mrs Vogel smiled for the camera and lied that this wasn’t invasive, oppressive and offensive, just us culture warriors doing our thing while the rest of you who don’t vote, don’t run for office, and don’t deserve to be citizens did what. Had a cheeseburger? Another one?

    And while some of you embrace the principles of civil discourse and have attention spans sufficient to remember what the discussion was, most others remember your salad days in the schoolyard and trot out your ad hominem one liners or stupendously irrelevant statistics. I commended Sergente for seeming to understand fact-based argument but he always swings for the fences yet forgets to bring a bat. Keenque is piqued that he hasn’t a PHD so offers an irrelevant secular education expense statistic. PapaBear, the only things that haven’t risen spectacularly in cost over time are silicon memory or cpu’s. And the minimum wage.

    And CC, do you know what you’re talking about slamming Walter Cronkite. Walter Cronkite? I don’t disagree that Dan Rather and Barbara Walters care more about celebrity than journalism, but you seriously think Limbaugh and Hannity don’t, and are journalists? That’s some powerful Kool-Aid, indeed, my son. And CC, freedom of speech isn’t achieved exclusively on Fox, or in English. Any more than there was just one perfect person (who did you nominate, CC?) who graced this earth. Or even the Sinai. Except in your view. To which you are surely entitled. And that’s freedom of speech. And of religion. You might want to pass it around.

    Or does this readership prefer bigots. If so I’m micturating in the wind. Or maybe illustrating your hypocrisy. And setting an example. You know, teaching. Like Jesus. Mohammed. Martin Luther. Buddha. Confucius. Brigham Young. Tom Cruse. But on a far smaller scale. And with far less competence. Excepting Tommy.

    • clarke conservative says:

      I would be the first to say Rush and Hannity are not journalists, they don’t pretend to be, unlike many ‘journalists’ on the left who plead their objectivity while knowingly lying through their teeth. Dan Rather, most of MSNBC, CNN, etc for example.

      Walter Cronkite = Big Liberal (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/cronkite/welcome.asp)

      And back to the original post – You define Jill Vogel (and me) as Cultural Warriors. If fighting for the most vunerable in our society is a Cultural Warrior then I proudly wear that badge. If exposing the truth to expecting mothers that the fetus she is carrying has an independant beating heart is your form of hypocracy, so be it.

      I know I will not change your mind. It is too full of anger. I used to be ambivalent about abortion. Seeing an ultrasound of my daughter at 8 weeks from conception is what changed mine. Some might call it an epiphany, to me it was definitely life changing.

    • “It appears time to again remind all you Rush wannabees and Hannity acolytes that the topic was abortion and hypocrisy, viz, how abortion is the law of the land but all you conservatives and zealots decided, because you don’t like it, it just ain’t right”

      A good 60% of the people didn’t like Obamacare when it was jammed down our throats either, but we had to eat it anyway. Now it’s your turn. And hey, there’s always New York.

      Before I go this morning though, consider this. You know how liberals are always schilling about “separation of church and state”?. And, of course, your contention is that we’re not a land of laws, but some sort of hippie commune that listens to the wind or whatever. Remember all of that?

      So tell me filosopo, where does the law, “Thou shalt not kill” come from? Don’t think too hard now. I know you can do this. Go ahead, say “God”.

      Whoa! Did I just see a liberal explode? Sorry CDN! Honeslty, I’m not trying to make liberal readers explode like vampires in the sunlight. 😉

      Yes, I said God, the original religious zealot. God, told us, among other things “Thou shalt not kill” . And we still have that law on the books today.

      Flash forward a few millenia. And here we have the “religious zealots” as you and the left like to call us, trying to continue to implement that law. Imagine that.

      That’s my contribution to the abortion part of the issue. See what the wind and cosmic vibes say about that.

      As for “hypocracy”, seen Barack Obama on display lately? Now there’s a great example of a muslim culture warrior for you. Obama has done more to spread radical islam lately than muhamad did in his time. I won’t even talk about the Middle East, but rather, take his recent actions against the Catholic church. (And here comes the hypocracy part).

      Remember now, how the left is always screaming about “separation of church and state”? That we can’t pray in schools or before football games, that we can’t say “Jesus” or have “Christmas” or Easter” break. Well, I guess that only works one way for Obama and his Marxists, as they have recently MANDATED that the church must provide contraceptives to employees and to people that take their charities, despite the beliefs of the church. Obama has also silenced military Cathoic chaplins who disagree with him on that and on the issue of Obamacare. Silenced them.

      Funny, too, in the world of hypocracy where the left is always touting “free speech”. Unless, of course, it’s speech they don’t agree with, then they silence it like they did in teh military. Funny too that the Catholic church is being told they must provide services that are against their beliefs, and yet muslims are exempt from Obamacare because of their religious beliefs. What’s the cosmic vibe have to say about that?

      Care to explain how that works, or about hypocracy as well, or is engaging in two subjects at a time too taxing?

    • You need to pay your due royalties to the creators of the freedom of speech.

  34. Mr. Marro wrote: “Keenque is piqued that he hasn’t a PHD so offers an irrelevant secular education expense statistic.”

    I’m piqued? I did not know that. I’m happy with my job working in aerospace.

    YOU are the one who commented on education in your opening paragraph. You were called on it. You cannot defend your position. Typical.

    Enough said.

  35. Donald C. Marro says:

    Whistle while I work, ta, da, dum, de, dum de da. It’s nice to see, Il Sergente, aerospace Keenque, and most of all, epiphany CC.

    So. Sergente. Feeling voluble today? And devout as well, I see. But Dottore, get the meds handy, and as they say in England “Take Courage” (a pretty good beer, by the way). Murder is a taboo. And it was first reduced to law by Urukagina, spelled as shown and not g-o-d. (I think his pals called him Uru)

    I’m sure you think there is a divine basis for everything, even body odor, but maybe not. Believe what you like, my son, I don’t object to what you do in your heart, your head, your bedroom, or your place of worship. But no crusades, please. No Inquisitions. No jihads. No fatwahs. And no inspiring of religious loonies who don’t read your divinely inspired letters to the editor so hear voices condoning the murder of abortion providers.

    Poor Sergente. This will come as a massive disappointment but you’ll recover. Take Courage.

    Now, Keenque. So glad to hear of your work in aerospace. And that you’re happy working in aerospace. I don’t see any relevance to knowing you work in aerospace but you must think it is impressive, you betcha. I hear Richard Branson is hiring. And Newt is gonna establish a lunar colony by 2020 with statehood soon to follow. Aren’t you lucky to be in aerospace. I mentioned how your SuperHeroes were content to cut funding and teaching staff, gutting thereby education. So you “called me out” by citing irrelevant stuff on how states were “forced” to take stimulus money and then touted anecdotal data on how cost per pupil rose but test scores didn’t, except in some unnamed private schools (Hogwarts, was it, or DoTheBoys?) where scores apparently rise when staff are thin and expenses thinner. Sounds just like the aerospasce business. Do you have cites or do you like arguing from shadows, something I don’t think of as an aerospace thing – is it?

    Now CC, can I rely on you to tell your friends the correct spelling of hypocrisy? And mantle (not mantra – sorry, please don’t clench your fists). I am quite sure you genuinely believe it is your place to protect a fetus, the least among us, did you say? CC, it isn’t. It’s a woman’s body, and a woman’s choice.

    You want to protect the least among us, help get rid of superstitution so women of all economic, racial and familial circumstances know how not to get pregnant, or abort safely, or have the support to raise, educate and look after themselves and their child if they deliver and don’t give the baby up for adoption (and how the hell can you promote that particular piece of mental indifference or cruelty) and the creep who impregnanted them is worthless. Stupid Sarge jokes about incest or West Virginia aside, pontificating sanctimoniously is enormously gratifying about a fetus, around which you can safely rally because it is inanimate (for all the animation you attempt to ascribe), but suddenly when it arrives, it’s less interesting?.

    Cut social services, ignore public education, pass out bootstraps to those you first stigmatize, is that about it?

    If you think to find pride in being a culture warrior, first see it for what it is – an endeavor to moralize, and the perpetuation of an underclass. Make no mistake, I am no conservative or liberal – not for nothing, I consider the political class opportunistic and generally uninspiring. There are some exceptions, like the Washington State legislator who lost her husband, and has a gay daughter, but came to understand the joy from the bond (not the sex) she had in her straight marriage was a joy arising from bonding with another person and one that she just couldn’t reasonably deny to her daughter or any human being.

    Abortion isn’t for everybody, just those who want it.

    Hypocrisy, on the other hand, isn’t for any body.

    No puns intended.

    • clarke conservative says:

      Mr. Marro.

      It has been my absolute pleasure to assist you in your complete alienation of the readers on CDN. Somewhat like your election results in November. The arrogance and condescension you have towards your fellow man is stunning. Your penchant for insults is no better than a high school debater, albeit with a slightly better vocabulary. Obvious when you don’t think you are winning the argument, you attack your opponent … which is all of the time.

      Again, I am very proud of my Senator, Jill Vogel, for sponsoring SB484. It will save a lot of lives.

    • “Murder is a taboo. And it was first reduced to law by Urukagina, spelled as shown and not g-o-d. (I think his pals called him Uru)”

      Too bad that we’re not Lagash, but nice of you to offer yet another example of a leader that realized murder is wrong. Fortunately, our law is based on Judeao Christain aspects, and it too says “Thou shalt not murder”

      So after all of that, you still have not answered the $100,000 dollar question. How is it that people who hold up that commandment are the “zealots” and yet people that advocate murder are not?

      Now of course I realize some people (like you) seemingly think that we are not a nation of laws, but rather that we are floating along on some cosmic wave. Of course, I guess you could call that hypocritical as well, considering the number of lawsuits you have floating around out there on the internet. But I digress.

      No, I contend that it is you and your side that are the zealots, tearing at the fabric of society. Of course, this is pretty standard of the left and the left side of the political spectrum, and has been going on for some time now.

      Look at the link to the congressional record here about the goals of the communist to try bring down this nation

      http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

      11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces

      12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

      14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office

      15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

      16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

      17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

      20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

      21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

      22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”

      23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”

      24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

      25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

      26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

      27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”

      28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”

      29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

      30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

      Look at how many of the goals of the communist are now the goals of the left. You all must be so proud of your progressive selves. BTW, Number 27 sound familiar?

      And again, anwer the question Batman. How is it that the left are the first ones that scream about separation of church and state, and yet here we have Obama telling, TELLING the Catholic church what it must do with regards to abortion and contraception

      Where is the American Communist Losers Party?. God knows they’re the first bunch of leftist lawyers on the scene when religion gets into the public scene, but where are they on behalf of the Catholics now, when separation of church and state is being violated in reverse order by the goverment ?

      Friggin crickets

  36. Roscoe Evans says:

    That laundry list of alleged communist claptrap was drafted entirely by Cleon Skousen, a rightwing political hack philosopher. It has no bearing on this discussion.

    Our Ms. Vogel has shown herself to be a liar by supporting a legal impediment to abortion that has no medical purpose, but is calculated only to add unnecessary time and cost to a medical procedure that for some women, at least, is a matter of life or death. She ought to be ashamed of herself, and those of you who support her are fools. If she is willing to tell you this lie she will tell you others.

    Abortion is the termination of a life. But it is not murder. Like self-defense, it is a legally permissible homicide. Nobody enjoys it, but there are times when it is a necessity, and it is lawful. I have seen the results of backalley abortions gone wrong, including babies who were born with no mental capacity, disabled limbs, and freakish deformities. If this subject intrigues you, don’t listen to your local political hack or religious psycho. Read broadly and educate yourself.

    Meanwhile, there is another story on this site about a local charity that needs help providing diapers and products for babies born to indigent local mothers. It’s sad but true that there are women having babies who cannot afford to meet the basic hygenic and medical needs for their young ones.

    How about taking some time off from your back and forth with Mr. Marro, and writing a check for $20.00 to help out these babies? Your concerns about the unborn surely can wait a bit. These, the born, need you now.

  37. clarke conservative says:

    Senator Vogel’s SB484 does not ban abortion. It requires the mother has an opportunity to see an ultrasound of the fetus before the abortion is (hopefully not) performed. 93% of abortions are elective, 6% because of defects to the child and less than 1% due to rape, incest, etc. Prior to Roe vs Wade, Virginia allowed for abortions in the 7% of cases.

    States that have laws like SB484 have seen the number of elected abortions drop dramatically. It is a good bill.

  38. Donald C. Marro says:

    Ah, seems the scenery is getting just a tad repetitive, and dare I say, stale.

    No, CC, Mrs. Vogel’s bill did not have the chutzpah (a nice Judeo-Christian term) to ban abortion, it was far too pusillanimous (sorry, I don’t know the Neanderthal – will Latin roots be OK?), but still thoroughly appealing to those like you whose idea of integrity celebrates such hypocrisy. And CC? Would it overtax you to actually list the states, the purported drops in abortion rates, the corresponding increase in birth rates, etc., or is that likely to be just too much daylight. Fox probably has the data, (er, did I say data?) or could make it up. Or is your imagination a more credible source? Tick tock.

    And Sarge, I don’t see that you’ve proven the tribal taboo against murder as being instead the revealed word of any god, the god of your fathers not yet having flexed any moral muscle in merrie old Lagash (though you did get Lagash correct, most of the good Lagash stock long ago elected to settle mostly in the Winchester area). Does it help that I point this out to you, or does your Judeo-Christian obsession nourish you so fully that you don’t have room for dessert (drop an “s” for a truly bad pun) or reason.

    Notwithstanding that there is so much intolerance about in these precincts, I’m quite pleased there are those who take this seriously and write soberly as well, exposing when they do the utter bankruptcy of the prevailing Heep-like moralizing in the face of real and unsatisfied needs unaddressed by your crusading Mrs. Vogel.

    So, CC, Sarge. What acts of Judeo-Christian kindness have you performed for non-fetuses. Deeds not words. Got any? Spill. (again, no pun intended)

    • I see that neither the wind, nor the cosmic vibe, has revealed to you the answers to the basic questions I posed, so I will leave you with YOUR Latin lesson and Jeopardy clue for the day;

      Don: I’ll take Latin words for a $1000 Sarge.

      It’s the Latin word for “Concede”, as in, “I have no answers to give, so I’ll concede the point”

      Don: Bing! Concedo!

      Sarge: Oh, I’m sorry Don, right answer but you didn’t phrase the answer in the form of a question. And I’m afraid that since you didn’t have a $1000 to begin with, this eliminates you from the final Jeopardy round

      Goodbye

  39. Donald C. Marro says:

    Say it ain’t so, Dottore.

    No Sarge to kick around? CC hors de combat? Could it be I’ve stumped the stars? Or maybe my puns are so bad even my sorry attempt at a William F. Buckley-esq (respects, Bill) vocabulary isn’t enough to make the girls want to dance with me.

    Doesn’t anybody have a pointless one-liner left? Or some warmed over Fox?

    Or (fingers crossed) maybe Mrs.Vogel herself in appropriate stentorian tones will tell us how this bullying bill helps assuage the guilt of becoming pregnant when you didn’t want to do so, or were told you wouldn’t, or had no choice along the lines of Sarge’s insensitive and otherwise contemptible construct, and amid all the social service cuts to and stigmatism of women’s choice and single moms.

    President Obama famously said guns, abortion restrictions and religion are the refuges of the small-minded. Wouldn’t you rather that weren’t true. Arm yourselves against criminal hordes and terrorists, bear all the kids you can produce during your periods of fecundity, pray 24 hours a day if you like. If you like. You. That’s your choice. But don’t expect, force or stigmatize those who’d do otherwise. That’s what this country is about.

    Isn’t it?

    • Mr. Marro.
      You revel in your taunting of the religious. That behavior is absent from the resume of both an intellectual and a leader. Where I come from being a “liberal” meant being open minded about all people, including the ones that you disagree with,so as to attempt to bring two differing sides together into a respectful accord. I use the past tense for that has changed,in part because of a legion of people who seemingly feel the need to insult those who have committed the crime of having a differing opinion, for whatever reason, of which you are a charter member.
      Additionally, I would care to know just who is stigmatizing you for not praying? You don’t need to reply for I already know the name: Donald C. Marro.

  40. “President Obama famously said guns, abortion restrictions and religion are the refuges of the small-minded.”
    Too bad that he didn’t have the guts to say that in front of a live camera, instead of a closed room with rich donors wanting to hear that so they can pony up cash for him. Your kind of hero huh?

  41. Roscoe Evans says:

    You know, Dave, Mr. Marro misquoted President Obama to prove his point. You seem to be compounding his errors. This is from Christianity Today, April 13, 2008:

    “And it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” Obama said.

    The comments were posted Friday on The Huffington Post, creating a wave of criticism from Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. John McCain, and other politicians as the April 22 Pennsylvania primary draws near.

    “The people of faith I know don’t ?cling to’ religion because they’re bitter. People embrace faith not because they are materially poor, but because they are spiritually rich,” Clinton said at a rally in Indianapolis.

    Now, Obama is spending time explaining his remarks.

    “Obviously, if I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that,” Obama said in a phone interview on Saturday with the Winston-Salem Journal. “But the underlying truth of what I said remains, which is simply that people who have seen their way of life upended because of economic distress are frustrated and rightfully so.”

    He continued, “People feel like Washington’s not listening to them, and as a consequence, they find that …”

    President (then Senator) Obama’s comments were not quite as harsh as his detractors like to portray them, nor were they totally benign. They simply were impolitic.

    Mr. Marro, I find myself agreeing with many of your thoughts, but put off greatly by your manners. You compel me, too frequently, to think of Newt Gingrich. Like him, you think you always are the smartest guy in the room. And, like Newt, you are so very often, simply wrong.

    I appreciate your desire to show off what you have learned all these years. But you are failing, miserably, to make your points.

    As I said, I have seen the results of failed abortions in the form of horribly deformed and retarded children who survived illegal operations. I am thankful that abortion is available to women as a legal, medical procedure to remedy a wide range of pregnancy complications, and for ethical, legal, and medical reasons believe the decision to terminate a pregnancy belongs exclusively to the woman and her medical care providers. There is no issue of whether such a procedure is “elective,” so long as it is in the patient’s best interests and it is done at her behest.

    Now, I hope some of you folks will be inclined to look to the article on this site that discusses the needs of indigent mothers, and donate some money for their assistance.

    Nothing any of us say about abortion is going to add anything substantive to the discourse on the subject. We can do some good though, while we’re still considering the subjects of pregnancy, birth, and the alternatives. Go ahead. Write a check, and mail it. Do some good.

    • Roscoe, thank you for improving the accuracy of what Mr. Obama said for our conversation. Hopefully you will do the same when someone takes what a Republican says out of full context as well. But you see for your own example what an Obama supporter does when they hear a sound bite.
      Mr. Marro is nothing more than a tree shaker. He walks up to a tree shakes it violently to see what falls from it and walks away. Quite honestly I wish there were a way to block him, like facebook, but alas I cannot.

      Stay warm

  42. Donald C. Marro says:

    So now it appears the children have finally left the room and a question can be posed to the adults. Why do you tolerate such self-righteousness and mean-spiritedness? Why not overwhelm Mrs. Vogel with criticism for not being a consummate conservative or even a consummate thinking person but rather a will o’ the wisp politician? Why not remind Mrs. Vogel that she isn’t the Senator from the religious right, and that R doesn’t mean “religious right”, nor does “religious right” mean “right” as in “not wrong” or “are you serious, stupid”.

    You let Potts get defeated. You stayed home in droves in the last cycle rather than vote for someone who stood tall while you ignored, even evaded, your civic responsibilities. You applied no pressure to make Mrs. Vogel take reasoned, committed positions even if you wouldn’t vote for the Democrat. There are viciously vituperative words to describe your conduct and you know them, each and every one, and they apply.

    Now a shout out for those who try.

    Mr. Evans, my compliments, sir. I don’t know why you think being the smartest guy in the room is something to shrink from, but OK, you’re free to dumb down your thoughts in order not to risk offending. I thought Bill Buckley had it right, stylistically at least, but Madison Avenue faux is just not my preference. And you’re as free to criticise me as I am to be indifferent to a need to have to prove my point. Mr. Evans, I think I prove my point by making it. I’ll never convert your neighbors but will challenge them – think that’s not enough? Probably right, but it’s enough for me that someone tells them to think so they don’t simply sustain one another with tales of being the anointed, or infallible, and that this country isn’t a gated community but melting pot of people and ideas, regardless of what Limbaugh or whatever flavor of the month otherwise tells them. Think that’s naive? It’s what I have left after learning of all those clay feet and the Santa Claus myth. Requiescat in pace, Father Coughlan, your legacy lives. At least Ailes is in it for money and ratings, but don’t tell any one he isn’t serious.

    Dave M., you struggle with expression but you try. Think of the devastating riposte, by all means, but think whether a point of view not your own has any merit. Any. No one will think less of you.

    You think this is insincere. Or patronizing? I think it’s a mirror.

  43. I feel like I’m reading an argument between Michael Moore and Jerry Falwell. This website reeks of arogance. I just don’t see how as a country we’ve made it so long when were so divided. And as far as abortion goes I think that this choice is the womans and that it should not be dictated in anyway by a few people with fake smiles and nice suits.

  44. But in all honesty says:

    Would it be so simple.. If people believe that abortion is murder, they are supposed to set that aside for the convenience of those that do? What would that say about their conscience at that point? I happen to believe that it is murder; Going back to the day in college when I heard debates about whether or not you have the right to do anything to your body (you don’t) and that a fetus is not viable to live by itself (so are two year olds); Medical science can fight for the life of one child in the womb in one room, where in another room just down the corridor a child of similar age is being killed by a vacuum cleaner. No, the issue is not settled, even if the supreme court says so. What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong, regardless of the fact that so many young women make the mistake of having a baby they are not ready to take care of. A woman does have a choice in the large majority of the cases, rape an incest set aside. Look at society and prove how much better off are we with abortion than without? What does it say about us as a group that so many people just simple support this issue as a “woman’s right”, like job equality? Those two issues do not even compare, we are talking about a LIFE and so many just quite casually just say “It’s a woman’s right”. When did being a woman give you the right to simply end a life for the reason of convenience? It’s her body no one should make a decision for her? Sounds passionate but it is argument for the weak of mind and soul.

  45. Right Winger says:

    “…A woman does have a choice in the large majority of the cases, rape an incest set aside….”

    So, are you arguing that abortion is okay in the case of rape or incest?

    “…I happen to believe that it is murder;…”

    Make up your mind.

  46. But in all honesty says:

    Well, an analysis of the english sentence seems to be in order
    : “A woman does have a choice in the large majority of the cases, rape an incest set aside”. Let’s pick it apart. The subject “A woman”, is said to have a choice in whether or not she got pregnant, IF (conditionally, as in she doesn’t have a choice” if her pregnancy was brought about either through
    rape or incest. (I assume that a woman that got pregnant by a blood relative became so without her consent).

    No argument was made supporting or not suporting abortion for these instances.

    I still do believe that is murder, and I don’t like being patronized by know it alls that cant parse a simple english sentence. Which is probably a good part of the reason why our national debt is so high, people can’t understand simple concepts within an english sentence with 18 9th grade words.

  47. But in all honesty says:

    Disappointing that people think that a woman’s convenience trumps the high probability by any standard that an unborn child is not a human being with rights. And we wonder on a daily basis why we see human tragedy after human tragedy in our society and think that tossing governemnt money at the problem is going to fix the issue. No wonder why are fiscally broke. It is because we became morally bankrupt decades ago.