I wish that Oswald Spengler wasn’t right. I wish that Julius Evola wasn’t right. But they are. In the summer on 1914, the western culture, light of the world, put a gun to its head and puled the trigger. Since that time, the world has been headed into a very, very dark place, and there is precious little that you can do about it. Read Epictetus, read the New Testament, read Count Evola’s works - “Men Among The Ruins” and “Ride The Tiger” are probably the best ones to help survive these times. Realize that the world as it is now doesn’t want to be helped - like a heroin addict who wants only to be left alone to die in a filthy alleyway with a needle sticking out of their arm.

It’s horribly depressing, and difficult to know how to deal with without lapsing either into Count Evola’s uncaring elitism or into boundless despair.

If you can, ride the tiger. If you can’t, drink and cry. I do some of both.

“Overpopulation” means “there are too many of you, and just the right amount of me.”
I know an affluent American lawyer with three children who had the abominable chutzpah to say he agreed with China’s one-child policy.

But then something bothers me about many American pro-lifers.  If you believe the state has a duty to defend the unborn, then
that duty doesn’t end after the infant is born and remains helpless to participate in any “free market”.  Don’t look to state power to prohibit women from getting abortions and then say to the infants, “well you’re on your own now, and if you suffer from poverty and neglect, it’s your parents’ responsibility, and the state has no responsibilty to defend you from parental neglect, or from the effects of the poverty in which you were born.”

Contra Rousseau, man is not “born free.”
Man is born in absolute helplessness and dependency, and remains that way for many years, and is never anything more than interdependent at best.  There is no self made man, as the good noblesse-obliging and wise-hearted (if not always wise-minded) Taki of all people knows and often reminds the privileged.

“The Life issue is a carrot which the Republicans dangle before jackasses like me so we will keep on pulling the cart. If you let the beast eat the carrot, he might just slip his traces, so you make sure to keep it just out of reach.
.....In return for the faint hope that this time, maybe this time we will have the chance to swing the Court back to honest jurisprudence on this (and other) issues, I will have to vote for a candidate who favors aggressive war, ruinous spending, cheap money and cheap imported labor… out of fear that if I don’t, the Democrat who wins will get to appoint a few more justices.”

Thanks for stating the dilemma that we all face so succinctly...it’s really why nothing changes.

Indeed, the way the Republican Party has been treating
right-to-lifers is by itself a reason to vote Democratic.

Better an open enemy than a false friend. An open enemy
can be converted, but a false friend keeps you shackled
with false promises, and keeps you from taking action on
your own.

There should be a penalty for that kind of behavior,
because if there is none, then they will know that the
way to deliver bad policy to the American people is
to promise “one day” to do something about abortion.

It is not going to be easy to get rid of abortion, we
better accept now, it will be a long haul, and we may
have to do some soul searching about the way single
mothers have been treated, and are still treated (as
a source of cheap labor, for one), and stop believing
that Politician A or Politician B will do it for us if
we are good and vote for him like sheep.

“After four pro-life presidents,...” - John Zmirak

Well I can’t disagree with you placing yourself among the jackasses, Mr. Zmirak.  And who exactly were these 4 pro-life presidents?  Nixon, who appointed the pro-aborts Berger and the odious Blackmun to the court?  Ford, who appointed the pro-abort Stevens?  Reagan, who signed into law the permssive abortion regime of California before Roe v. Wade and then appointed the pro-aborts O’Connor and Kennedy to the court?  Bush, Sr., who appointed the pro-abort Souter to the court? (At least he had a 50/50 split on his Supreme Court appointments - clearly the best we can expect from a Republican president.) Or maybe little Bush, with his appointment of the pro-aborts Alito and Roberts, both of whom have said that Roe v. Wade is established precedent that should be respected?

Vote for the lesser evil and you will get evil every time and it won’t always be lesser.  Yes, I voted for a couple of these guys myself - Reagan and Bush, Sr. - mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.  I have a long learning curve, but eventually, after being lied to a sufficient number of times, I do learn.  You, Mr. Zmirak, seem proudly determined never to learn.  You as much as announce in advance your support for the sociopathic militarist McCain - unless Ron Paul makes a third party run.  As long as the GOP can count on the automatic vote of all the pro-life jackasses, they have absolutely no incentive to actually do anything to end abortion.  Indeed the end of abortion would not be in their interest as it would deprive them of the “issue” which gets them the jackass vote.

>As Vonnegut wrote of the ruins of Dresden, “So it goes.”

The proper credit should go to Shakespeare and his play “King Lear”. After all the sorrows and tragedies, which were many, king Lear got message of his son’s death, or maybe it was his daughter’s, I don’t quite remember which. Tired and overwhelmed by it all, king Lear couldn’t bring himself to react in a “proper” way. He just managed the tired and disillusioned “So it goes”.

Trivia; the most evil day of the year is traditionally Valpurgia’s night, the night of the Devil. Which is the last day of April.

The only major religion that states that the fetus is part of the woman’s body and that she can do with it what she wants, is Judaism. Interesting coincidence that it also happens to be the supposedly modern and enlightened attitude. All other major religions state that human life starts at conception.

Another medical phenomenon in the USA, but not in Europe, is the belief that male circucision is good for not giving women cancer. Which of course is complete rubbish. But since “research” and many doctors have come to that conclusion, many people believe in it. The only little problem with this is that all these researchers and all these doctors belong to the same paranoid tribe. Members of this tribe have gone to lengths to make the rest of the population more like them, so that they couldn’t be singled out by this little physical detail. In case some new dictator was to go after them in the future.

Since they couldn’t convince the rest of the population of the necessity of sporting hooked noses, they instead assimilate to the majority instead.

So it goes.

John Ball;

So are you saying that you can’t oppose murdering someone unless you’re in favor of setting up a socialist nanny state to take care of them? Or am I misreading you there?

A great step for me in falling away from politics, and especially from Republican Party “conservatism” was the realization that, indeed, the Party was unserious about the right to life issue. G.W. Bush, in control of the White House and with friendly majorities in both houses of Congress, could have done something - anything - about the issue (remember Pat Moynihan and his 10,000% tax on bullets idea?). Instead he did essentially nothing.

And now the issue is essentially dead - as dead as another 4500 of our children will be by the time the sun sets today. We’re not the people we used to be, or that we say we are. The Party has found another thing that will keep the rubes turned out in November - terror of the Islamic boogeyman. The politics of our time is driven, in both parties, by one scare after another - fear of guns, fear of Muslims, fear of the prospect we’ll all starve in the streets unless there’s a multibillion-dollar government program to ensure that we don’t.

With adults like these, who needs children?

roe v wade shuold be overturned.  I’m pro choice, but if the flyover states want to turn themselves into a meth addled, gun toting version of radical islam, mexico and other overpopulated third world hellholes that’s fine with me. bring back prayer in school, take out sex ed.  we shuold be free to be you and me.

Fly-over country?!?!

New York City, Chicago, and LA are not overpopulated hell holes?!?  Isn’t that why most NY’rs flee to suburbs?  And aren’t those the cities where meth runs through the public water fountains?

Mr. Higdon: Precisely my point. Read between the lines....

Mr. Senna: Last time I checked, the following pioneers in the promotion of the Culture of Death were gentiles:
Margaret Sanger
Alfred Kinsey
Havelock Ellis
Nelson Rockefeller
Prescott Bush (big in CT. Planned Parenthood)
Eleanor Roosevelt

And their heirs:
Ted Kennedy
Mario Cuomo
Rudolph Giuliani
Bill and Hill Clinton
and so on…

While there may be elements of inter-group rivalry in the battle between contraceptive-feminism/eugenics and traditional sexual morality, it trivializes the issue to reduce it to that. Read “Blessed Are the Barren” to see how it was upper class liberal Protestant women who served as the transmission belt for sexual radicalism.  If Jews are to blame for the decadence of our culture, then why are things so much worse in the very parts of Europe where Hitler murdered most of them?

cmatt- don’t you have some women showing too much ankle to cane?  or a fatwa to recite

So, who is responsible for legal abortion?  Is it
“the Jews”?  The “gentiles”?  The Protestants?
Fallen away Catholics?  Which?

The answer:

All of them.  They are all products of The
Revolution.  It is the Revolutionary mindset that
reasons abortion into existence.  The Revolution
gives us secularism; that is, society without God,
a society without a Law Giver.  Soceity itself comes
to replace that Law Giver with “law makers”, men
sitting in rooms writing words in books and then
voting on them.

I wish that Oswald Spengler wasn’t right. I wish that Julius Evola wasn’t right. But they are. In the summer on 1914, the western culture, light of the world, put a gun to its head and puled the trigger.
The gun they put to their heads was the thought of nationalists, racialists, Hegelians, and Spengler and Evola (both either fascists or proto- fascists or neo-pagans, and hardly “pro-life")

So are you saying that you can’t oppose murdering someone unless you’re in favor of setting up a socialist nanny state to take care of them? The fallacy of False Dilemma. Otherwise, Nergol is making some good points. So is John Ball! If I knew John Ball’s address, and if I had a copy handy other than my own, I mail to John Ball The compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.

The silver lining to today’s Day of Infamy: we Tory Conservatives, Traditional Catholics, Muslems, Hindus, and Confucians are outbreeding ecologists, Feminists, Social Democrats, Marxists, decadents, The Last Man, agnostics, atheists, backsliders, and the lukewarm.

The moral/political lesson of today’s reality:  Let’s form a Christian Democratic Party!  The Italians have a better political system than we: the voters there have choices.

<<Let’s form a Christian Democratic Party!>>

No thanks.

Look at what’s happened to Germany.  They are now being ruled over by a East German Protestant.  With a strong Christian Democratic Party here in America it would probably be controlled by Southern Protestants.  That’s the Republican Party here, so why bother with creating a new party?

<<The Italians have a better political system than we>>

Mr Cundiff, please.  To stay on the topic of abortion: if the Italian political system is “better”, why is it that abortion is comparable to the current (albeit, lower than it has been) rate in the United States?

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again:

Democracy doesn’t work; for one thing, 50% of the population have a below average intelligence.

A piece of news from the estimable Dan McCarthy:
Pro-Life Activist Norma McCorvey (’Jane Roe’ of Roe v. Wade) Endorses Ron Paul for President

January 22, 2008 703-248-9115

WASHINGTON, DC – On Tuesday, January 22 – the 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision – Norma McCorvey has endorsed Texas Congressman Ron Paul for president.

Norma McCorvey runs Crossing over Ministry – formerly Roe No More Ministry – and is best known as “Jane Roe” in the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision.  McCorvey, who is now a pro-life activist, issued the following endorsement of Congressman Paul:

“Ron Paul states, ‘The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty.’

“I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v Wade.  Ron Paul doesn’t just talk about being pro-life, he acts on it. His voting record truly is impeccable and he undoubtedly understands our constitutional republic and the inalienable right to life for all. Ron Paul is the prime author of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v. Wade. As the signor of the affidavit that legalized abortion 35 years ago I appreciate Ron Paul’s action to restore protection for the unborn. Ron Paul has also authored H.R. 1094 in Congress, which seeks to define life as beginning at conception. He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn.

“After taking all of the presidential candidates into consideration, it is obvious that Ron Paul is the only one that doesn’t just talk the talk. For this reason and those stated above, I am publicly endorsing Ron Paul for president.”

For anyone who thinks that Jews are fetucidal mainiacs, take a trip to Williamsburg in Brooklyn. You’ll never see another urban neighborhood with so many light-skinned children and young and healthy looking young mothers.

Democracy doesn’t work; for one thing, 50% of the population have a below average intelligence.

Assuming that it is the less intelligent having these abortions (a big assumption I know) maybe legalised abortion will improve democracy’s prospects.

Cripes Cundiff but I was not aware that all ecologists are satanists. Nor was I fully aware that the Itralians had a better form of Democracy than ours...other than the fact that Italy is proof that several hundred years of anarchy can work.

As to abortion and the Court acting as Congress, I don’t really know what to think aside from knowing in my heart that it is infanticide and this bodes ill for a people who presume to have a “culture”. Perhaps if the “Pro Choice” brigades called it Infanticide instead of “womans reproductive rights” we might have a full public review of the issue but , like everything political, we shall be treated to half-truths...particularly when said half truths sell newspapers.

John I cannot believe that you are going to vote for anyone other than Ron Paul.  I will be writing him in is it comes to that.  Kurt is correct.  Don’t carry water for their lesser of two evils strategy.  We have to send then a clear message that they can hear in no uncertain terms.  This has gone on long enough.

“barring a Ron Paul third-party run, I will vote this November, like most of you, for the Evil of Two Lessers”

Why choose the lesser of evils?

Cthulhu for President 2008!

<<...maybe legalised abortion will improve democracy’s prospects.>>

Other than refuting the obvious repugnant nature of this post, let me remind “Andrew” of one of the “laws of nature”: regression towards the mean.  The child of two people with extremely high IQs will not necessarily also have an extremeley high IQ.  The child’s score will “regress” towards the mean.  Any improvements in IQ over society will be marginal - besides, how many dead people is it worth improving the average IQ by 5 points?  Also, by legalizing murder, does that in turn actually lower the average IQ by way of promoting a culture of death over life?  People that are alive tend to have higher IQs than those dead.

@ Senna:

What does April 30th, echatologically speaking,have too do with January 22nd

John Zmirak wrote: If Jews are to blame for the decadence of our culture, then why are things so much worse in the very parts of Europe where Hitler murdered most of them?

Please Mr. Zmirak. This is not Penn & Teller and contrary to their illusions your rhetorical tricks are pretty transparent.

First. Those names you wrote have nothing to do with the fact that Judaism is the only major religion that states the woman’s right to do whatever she wants with the fetus. Or if you like a more PC expression, pro-choice. Being that all of the world’s major religions are older than the “modern” age we need not worrying which came first. Judaism is the source of the idea that it is up to the woman to decide whether she’ll keep her child or kill it. If you believe this to be false, please go ahead and prove it wrong.

The practice of circumcision, supposedly for medical reasons, has its root in the American Jewish community. You can try to disprove that too.

Second. Your mentioning of the mass killings of Jews during Hitler’s reign might give us a hint as to why the Jews have pushed for the “right” to abortion. Maybe a nation that never forgives and never forgets simply wanted revenge? What is the magic number of aborted fetuses since WW2? I bet it is way beyond 6 million. But as rabbi Meir Kahane said, one jewish fingernail is worth more than one hundred gentiles, or something like that.

As to why things are “worse” in Europe, here’s the simple explanation. The european upper classes, which are mostly leftist, get all their “inspiration” from American leftists. Meaning very often American Jews. So all those socialist ideas, all those marxist definitions all that ugly human hating communism has much of its roots in the USA. 

The example of Williamsburg in Brooklyn shows again the double standards of Jews. They keep their babies, but their kinsmen want us to kill our own.

Infanticide, universal in the Greco-Roman world, was barely even criticized by Classical writers. It took the early Christians, all of Jewish origins and most of them still circumcised, to start saving those babies. I hope Christians and Jews can work together again to save babies--as the good Yehuda Levin (http://www.jewsforlife.org/Jewish-leaders.cfm)
has been doing for decades. I used to meet him at Operation Rescue events.

The practice of circumcision, supposedly for medical reasons, has its root in the American Jewish community. You can try to disprove that too.

Do you mean the circumcision of non-Jews, or circumcision at all?

A “Christian” country killing its own children at the rate of a million and a half a year is not the fault of the Jews. I’m sorry, but even if we assumed that that’s what the International Jewish Conspiracy wanted us to do, if our culture is really so weak that they can “make” us do that, then that’s still our fault.

Andrew;

Think again. Go see “Idiocracy”, which will likely turn out to be the most prophetically accurate thing since Huxley wrote “Brave New World”.

Andrew Capp:Other than refuting the obvious repugnant nature of this post, let me remind “Andrew” of one of the “laws of nature”: regression towards the mean.  The child of two people with extremely high IQs will not necessarily also have an extremeley high IQ.  The child’s score will “regress” towards the mean.

Don’t stop there. The child’s score will regress towards the mean of the population group of the parents. Based on the data I’ve seen certain “population groups” have more abortions per capita than others in the US.

Nergol,

I enjoyed Idiocracy. We’re much closer than 500 years to that world.

Seriously though, the American fetus fetishists give most of us (ie. non-USAians) the creeps. Where are the children of those anti-abortion protesters? At left wing public schools or at home in front of the babysitter (ie. TV) being brainwashed, perhaps?

Abortion may be gruesome but instead of trying to tell other people what to do with their offspring (a choice they make freely) maybe the Religious Right should concentrate on raising their own children or working to create cultural change to counter the sick culture we all live in. Ranting and raving and waving bibles outside clinics reinforces the public perception that the activists are moralising nutjobs. You are not winning anybody over. Meanwhile more important issues, like immigration, states and local rights (important for the abortion issue too), foreign wars, and monetary policy, seem to get sacrificed by American conservatives.

<<Where are the children of those anti-abortion protesters?>>

I’m going out on a limb here, and answering: either with the protesters themselves or with the other parent, at home in school; that is, “home school”.  Your “average” Christian abortion rights protesters is way too “hard core” to be sending their children to the government propaganda camp.

<<...maybe the Religious Right should concentrate on raising their own children or working to create cultural change to counter the sick culture we all live in.>>

Believe you me, they are doing just that.  The only problem is, they are vastly outnumbered by the participants of the decrepit culture at-large.

<<Ranting and raving and waving bibles outside clinics reinforces the public perception that the activists are moralising nutjobs.>>

I would agree with that.  I’m not a big fan of public protesting/prayer/"rant and raving”.

<<Meanwhile more important issues, like immigration, states and local rights (important for the abortion issue too), foreign wars, and monetary policy, seem to get sacrificed by American conservatives.>>

That is, IF there were actually some meaningful number of “American conservatives”.  There aren’t.

and the women’s movement had NOTHING to do with the pro choice movement?

@lester

The woman’s movement had something to do.

As did the Chuch’s acquiescence (and participation -
as in the Magdalene laundries in Ireland) in the brutal
mistreatment of single mothers by society through the
ages. Faster way to teach women that their children are
their enemy.

Old sins have a way to come back and bite you in
the ass.

Adriana is right on the money. The hysterical hostility toward single mothers that pervaded Western societies (let’s leave aside Islamic, just for now) no doubt made birth control and later abortion seem like a godsend. Ironically, the Church NOW treats unwed mothers who choose to keep their babies with great tenderness and regards them as virtually heroic--given that they could easily and cheaply avoid the responsibility (as the man involved typically does). One friend of mine suggested that perhaps God allowed the evil of abortion to happen in order to correct the pharisaical behavior of Christians. However, I’ll note that obsessions with legitimacy and the stability of the family--and hence female chastity--are widespread through most human cultures (excepting, it seems, some African societies). They aren’t of Christian or Jewish origin, but seem to be a typical outgrowth of human biology--and the need for men to “know” that their offspring are their own if they are going to support them. Or, as my Cajun friends used to say: “Mama’s baby is Papa’s maybe.”

c matt- sorry about those remarks.  I was having a bad day