Get PJ Media on your Apple

Unexamined Premises

Dr. Mengele, I Presume

April 15th, 2013 - 12:11 am

How, in the name of a putative and anodyne “right to choose,” did we move from a country that prized the sanctity of life to a degenerate, bloodthirsty society that literally strangles its own children? A more profound act of self-loathing disguised as “reproductive justice”  can hardly be imagined; it’s Satanic, really.

There’s something in journalism that’s come to be known as “Godwin’s Law,” which posits: ”As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.” Obviously, I’ve violated it, and deliberately so, because the point of comparison is identical: an affectless unwillingness to treat every human being as fully human, and instead to sacrifice them for a higher cause. When morality is untethered from religion, and tied instead to culture/Kultur, savagery results.

And yet for many on the left, abortion remains the greatest of the secular sacraments, murder as a positive good. I’ve met many young women in our business who tell me that they don’t mind my conservative politics, that much, but the one thing that they absolutely cannot compromise on, or even discuss, is Roe v. Wade. How the maternal instinct was extirpated in a generation or two of women is something for behavioral scientists and theologians to debate; the modern left’s transformation into a suicide cult will give historians and artists grist for decades to come.

We don’t know where it began, although Roe is certainly a good place to start. But we do know where it ends, by whichever name we choose to call the place:

Endstation Auschwitz

<- Prev  Page 4 of 4   View as Single Page

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
The really frightening aspect of this case is not the butchery on trial but the willingness of the news organizations and the rest of what W F Buckley used to call the "hive" averting their gaze from actual, undiluted infanticide in service to their ideology. One shudders to imagine what they might be willing to tolerate or even promote under the right circumstances.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It was communists in China who decided that a girl's life was worthless, but it's the "right" that's engaged in a "war on women", right?

It was Teddy Kennedy who drove a young girl off a bridge then ran away and hid his drunkenness and miscreant behavior, but it's the "right" who is engaged in a war on women, right?

It was Bill Clinton, who, in a SEXUAL HARASSMENT LAWSUIT, was asked whether he had ever promised any woman in his employ a promotion, job, or improved economic position (Revlon), in exchange for keeping quiet about their adultery. (Monica Lewinsky). But, it's the "right" engaged in a war on women, right?

But who...is engaged in a war on babies? The right has done everything it can to protect them.

The leftists in government and their media (but I repeat myself) have hidden, dissembled, parsed, covered up, lied, slandered, and misdirected this country into a state of soul removal.

Face it, we are all leftists now.

And, we are watching the blowback up close and personal...when we can get the "news" that isn't filtered by the state's media.

We don't care about the Constitution. We don't care about legislative rules, checks and balances, we don't care about truth, honor or human decency.

Our government and our information stream are poisoned and toxic.

For over forty years we have been a nation hard at work to destroy itself. We have succeeded in "Going Rouge".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When the failed “War on Poverty” produced institutionalized poverty and dependency characterized in part by illegitimate births and the resultant unwanted children (unwanted except possibly as a source of income) the liberal had two choices to make in order to mitigate the problem. They could revisit the program in order to abolish or radically change it, which would be an unacceptable admission of failure, or quietly dispose of the most highly visible products of its failure…the unwanted babies. Liberals don’t admit failure. Never ever.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (64)
All Comments   (64)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Original Jeannette,

My mom's birthday is this week. She fussed at me for sending her a present. Silly mom.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When the subject is death camps, Godwin's Law is irrelevant: the topic started with Mengele's laboratory.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"And yet for many on the left, abortion remains the greatest of the secular sacraments, murder as a positive good."

Or, sometimes, a sacrifice: Remember the (French Canadian?) feminist who said that unwanted babies should be sacrificed to the Goddess Artemis?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
This song goes out to Dr. Gosnell...

Dead Can Dance - Black Sun

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVNQBZMVSe0
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When decided the chorus sang that making abortion legal would remove it from the butcher shop to the clinic: clean and neat.

Now it seems to me that rather than elevating the practice, it has reduced it to what it is, a squalid atrocity, an abattoir.

Classical culture did it, the Chinese too. Both cultures were callus, certainly, and we must ask is our moralistic comfort worth the cost to our quality of life.

Someone said: "Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me." Well no matter, we know in our wisdom the world will give us a free pass for anything we care to do.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
someone might want to look up "stirpicultire." It's the breeding of special, superior, children. They were spawned at the Oneida Community. Before that, the children borne were "accidents." The community was founded by a direct descendant of Puritan ministers. The founder's cousin was President of the USA, his father was a senator, his other cousins were professors.

Noyes, himself, published a successful newspaper. It was read by Marx and Engels. If you ever wondered why socialists are so very, very, very certain that "this time" children in a community day-care will work best- it's because they read that this one time, it worked. You have to admit, it's a really peculiarly specific idea- they don't know how the state will wither, or how equality will be achieved- but they are sure that children will not be in a nuclear family's care.

Anyway- the perfectionist cult spawned off a newspaper, and descendants who are still running around the northeastern liberal arts colleges. The ideology of unlimited sexual activity is worth everything in the world, and that infants are grade-able- perfect or accidental- is a wide-spread notion. We know that "accidental" pregnancies are the ones aborted, today.

They are serious about the "everything in the world' is worth sexual activity. The members lived in poverty, and then small apartments in a big dorm-house. When people left the cult, they left with the clothes on their back. They didn't practice communion, or regular church- so no encountering any transcendance. And, as far as I can tell, they didn't have regular friends, or hobbies. The chief complaint, as they aged, is that younger members wouldn't come have sex with them. My grandmother crocheted afghans and prayed daily. That sounds like a normal hobby for someone old, not having sex with teenagers.

I wonder about the first "accidental" children of that community. I've read that older men bedded the younger girls- that is, old men and 13 year old girls. I wonder where those girls came from- were they raised as prey? The men practiced habits that sort- of worked like birth control. That was their excuse for getting to sleep with nubile young women.

I can't imagine someone adopting into that cult- they had a factory with hired hands. Shakers adopted children- but didn't prey on them.

Women had to sign pledges to turn over their children to the collective, to even try to get pregnant, once the collective decided to allow births. They weren't even trying for normal children. They were trying to breed "super-children." That's "stirpiculture." The founder had been reading Darwin and Galton, and wanted to practice. We still have the signed pledges.

This sounds odd, until one reads that in Vietnam, today, women have to get permission to try to get pregnant. China, too.

The breakdown on abortions is 80% single women, 20% married. I don't actually understand the married statistic. It seems like it would be zero. The breakdown by race is fairly unnerving, too, city by city. There are more abortions than live births of black infants in New York, for instance.

Nazis read up on Darwin, Galton, and other socialists. Noyes' magazine was named "The Socialist." I have no idea if Nazi's read old newspapers from America. But- the idea pool is the same water.

When we talk about how someone could imagine aborting their child, I'm not sure that the advocates of abortion are talking about 'wanted' children. They've got a whole language of 'accidental' and "unwanted" and "not human" that right-siders and more mainstream religious don't have access to. I'd say orthodox, but I don't necessarily mean capital O- I just mean conventional, main-stream religious. The people advocating this- they all had newspapers, they all read each other's work, they all published books- award-winning, right regularly, I might add.

Most of the posters here are wondering how someone could make such a criminal, perverse hash of normal sentiments and thought. It's not a disorderly mess- it's a worked out, coherent philosophy. It's just one that horrifies more conventional people.

Seriously, if you ever wondered why the Israelites, the Romans, attempted to wipe out particular populations- the Canaanites and the Phoenicians- it's exactly the same reasons- child sacrifice.







1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Of course the liberals "know" abortion is murder. They simply have a higher purpose in mind. They cannot utter the word "baby," In order to assuage their guilt, they refer to the unborn as a "clump of cells" or a "fetus." They also can't admit that the unborn are "alive." They may not be able to survive outside the womb, but they are "alive" from the time of conception.

Once delivered, children in the progressives' minds are then worthy of such protections that trample the rights of the law abiding such as the gun law backlash from Sandy Hook.

Liberals live in an upside down world where up is down, black is white and to understand the progressive's mindset, you must understand that "issues" like abortion, racism and global climate change have become the new religion for the godless.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Things look bleak, but 95 years ago, Our Lady of Fatima promised that "Russia will spread her errors... but in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph". I wish I knew the timeframe..
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There is a very important point to keep up front even as the abortion-rights folks try to distance themselves from this "outlier." At least six women and girls, including the mother of Baby Boy A, walked into a supremely reputable clinic in Maryland, a member of the prestigious National Abortion Federation, no less, only to end up in Philly, doped within inches of their lives by rank amateurs, and left moaning on blood-stained blankets in a flea-infested house of horrors. Let that sink in. Kermit Gosnell worked for a National Abortion Federation member clinic. The word for that is not "outlier." It's "employee." Do *not* let them paint this man not being one of them.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I've never understood a woman who can kill her baby. I've never understood the doctors and nurses who help the woman kill her baby. I've never understood the vehement supporters of those women who kill their babies. I never will.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
A bit of research will show that the normal psychology of pregnancy is an easy thing for abortion salespeople to exploit.

First there is an almost stunned disbelief that this is even real. The sales pitch that the abortion will make it all go away is particularly helpful at this time. Convince the woman that it will be as if she was never pregnant int he first place, reinforce the denial. Ca-ching!

Second, there is a time of fear and uneasiness. Can I cope? I don't think I can! This is too overwhelming! So they don't tell the woman that these feelings and thoughts are normal and will pass. Tell her that they are powerful evidience that she is totally unprepared for motherhood and will be unable to cope, unable to properly care for her baby. Scare her into believing her irrational fears. This is actually a sales technique abortion staff are trained in.

Only after the woman has passed through these two phases is she ready for bonding with her unborn baby. This used to happen around "quickening," when the mother felt the baby move and he or she became much more real to the mother. Nowadays it can happen much sooner, of course, thanks to ultrasounds and doppler fetal heart tone monitors. Why do you think abortionists are so dead set against allowing the mother to see or hear her baby? Because they know that once she passes that line, once it really sinks into her consciousness that this is her baby, alive inside her, their sales pitches will fall mostly on deaf ears.

Pretty evil, to use normal psychology that way, isn't it?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Great post. This needs to be repeated over and over.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And over and over again. Such malevolence. The "banality of evil" indeed.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 Next View All